Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better ..

wang wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I got two opportunities to carry out my future reserach career, one is
> on developing solid state quantum computer, in Germany; the other is
> on medical physics, using carbon nanotube technologies for developing
> novel systems and devices, for cancer diagnosticsa and cancer therapy,
> in USA.
> Anybody know which is better for a future career ?
> Hope your answer, thanks.
>
> Wang
>

I just started reading a paper on quantum computing in a recent issue of
"Science" and I've read a number on carbon nanotubes.

Both areas are highly theoretical right now and are far from producing any
marketable devices. How long anyone is going to investigate them depends
on the progress that's made as well as, more importantly, funding. If
there's no money to continue the research, work in those areas will
grind to a halt.

Even if you succeed in obtaining a degree in either field, will there be
any gainful employment awaiting you? Would you be willing to spend years
studying something only to find that there are no jobs there?

You may want to consider going into another area where prospects are
considerably more favourable.
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

BroTher zAchary wrote:
> BMJ wrote:
>
>>wang wrote:
>>
>>>Dear all,
>>>
>>>I got two opportunities to carry out my future reserach career, one is
>>>on developing solid state quantum computer, in Germany; the other is
>>>on medical physics, using carbon nanotube technologies for developing
>>>novel systems and devices, for cancer diagnosticsa and cancer therapy,
>>>in USA.
>>>Anybody know which is better for a future career ?
>>>Hope your answer, thanks.
>>>
>>>Wang
>>>
>>
>>I just started reading a paper on quantum computing in a recent issue of
>>"Science" and I've read a number on carbon nanotubes.
>>
>>Both areas are highly theoretical right now and are far from producing any
>>marketable devices.
>
>
> They theorize about a decade (but we've heard that one before) for
> CNTs. There has been much work done on CNT/CMOS integration, for
> instance. It may be a way to effectively continue Moore's Law, insofar
> as computer performance goes. CNTs could have quite a wide variety of
> app's. Such knowledge could make one valuable in a number of
> industries.
>

Like you've said, we've heard this before. I keep hearing "another five
years" for fuel cells, and have heard that for at least the last ten
years. Controlled nuclear fusion is in the same realm, though it's
timeframe is on the order of twenty years.

Even if nanotubes amount to something, will there be a viable industry
where any knowledge or experience could be used and where would it be
located?
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

wang wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I got two opportunities to carry out my future reserach career, one is
> on developing solid state quantum computer, in Germany; the other is
> on medical physics, using carbon nanotube technologies for developing
> novel systems and devices, for cancer diagnosticsa and cancer therapy,
> in USA.
> Anybody know which is better for a future career ?
> Hope your answer, thanks.

I did a PhD in the field closely associated with quantum computing. My
impression is that we are far far away from solid state quantum
computers. They are 20 or 30 years away if never. Germany is a racist
country; Germans will look down upon you, a Chinese. Americans are
better. I think carbon nanotubes are very close to usage in medical
devices, so that you would be able to find a gainful employment at a
company in the same field as your PhD. You will never be able to find
employment on the same topic as PhD studies in solid state quantum
computing. You will likely develop the skills in semiconductor
fabrication, and thus you will need to transition to this field. The
jobs are relatively plentiful in semiconductor technology, but it is
not a fact that you can make an easy transition. The living
scholarships in Germany provide a better standard of living than
scholarships in the US. The reason is that in the USA you will still be
a student, and in Germany you will be more like a "professional" in
"advanced training". You will need take care about building networks
which will later be your source of jobs. If you intend to go to the USA
after finishing your PhD, than you will be better off doing your PhD in
the USA.

\/
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

Thank you Zhai,

I should make a careful consideration on it. Your advice is really
inprotant for me.
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

wang wrote:
> Thank you Zhai,
>
> I should make a careful consideration on it. Your advice is really
> inprotant for me.

Toss the coin or come up with the idea of building quantum computer out
nanotubes and you take them all.
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

BMJ wrote:
> BroTher zAchary wrote:
> > BMJ wrote:
> >
> >>wang wrote:
> >>
> >>>Dear all,
> >>>
> >>>I got two opportunities to carry out my future reserach career, one is
> >>>on developing solid state quantum computer, in Germany; the other is
> >>>on medical physics, using carbon nanotube technologies for developing
> >>>novel systems and devices, for cancer diagnosticsa and cancer therapy,
> >>>in USA.
> >>>Anybody know which is better for a future career ?
> >>>Hope your answer, thanks.
> >>>
> >>>Wang
> >>>
> >>
> >>I just started reading a paper on quantum computing in a recent issue of
> >>"Science" and I've read a number on carbon nanotubes.
> >>
> >>Both areas are highly theoretical right now and are far from producing any
> >>marketable devices.
> >
> >
> > They theorize about a decade (but we've heard that one before) for
> > CNTs. There has been much work done on CNT/CMOS integration, for
> > instance. It may be a way to effectively continue Moore's Law, insofar
> > as computer performance goes. CNTs could have quite a wide variety of
> > app's. Such knowledge could make one valuable in a number of
> > industries.
> >
>
> Like you've said, we've heard this before. I keep hearing "another five
> years" for fuel cells, and have heard that for at least the last ten
> years. Controlled nuclear fusion is in the same realm, though it's
> timeframe is on the order of twenty years.

I spent a summer working on the ORMAK tokamak at Oak Ridge
over 30 years ago (our experiment actually achieved fusion with
injection of deuterium beams into a deuterium plasma, although
nowhere near breakeven of course), and at that time fusion power
had already been talked about for 20 years. Twenty years always
seems to be the timeframe on that.

>
> Even if nanotubes amount to something, will there be a viable industry
> where any knowledge or experience could be used and where would it be
> located?

Anywhere there is carbon?

Cheers,
Russell
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

Panno Zhai wrote:
>
>Germany is a racist country; Germans will look down upon you, a Chinese. Americans >are better.
>

The Germans are not worse or better than any others Americans
including. The difference is that in the US there are substantially
more Chinese than in Germany, which creates a sense of comfort.
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

Is it so difficult to find a job with quantum computer ?
I think at least better than TOKAMAK..., somebody told me it is also
hot...
but I am really not sure if it is better or not than nano technologies,

while for medical physics, they said I can get lot money with it in
US, is that so ?
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

Russell.Martin.TakeThisOut@wdn.com wrote:

<snip>

>>Like you've said, we've heard this before. I keep hearing "another five
>>years" for fuel cells, and have heard that for at least the last ten
>>years. Controlled nuclear fusion is in the same realm, though it's
>>timeframe is on the order of twenty years.
>
>
> I spent a summer working on the ORMAK tokamak at Oak Ridge
> over 30 years ago (our experiment actually achieved fusion with
> injection of deuterium beams into a deuterium plasma, although
> nowhere near breakeven of course), and at that time fusion power
> had already been talked about for 20 years. Twenty years always
> seems to be the timeframe on that.

I doubt that ITER, which is to be located in France, is going to bring
us closer to a solution.

>
>
>>Even if nanotubes amount to something, will there be a viable industry
>>where any knowledge or experience could be used and where would it be
>>located?
>
>
> Anywhere there is carbon?

I was thinking more in terms of outsourcing/offshoring/whatever.

>
> Cheers,
> Russell
>
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

wang wrote:
> Is it so difficult to find a job with quantum computer ?

It's an exotic "out there" field that is more theoretical than
practical. The concept looks good on paper, but, so far, the best I've
heard that anyone can do with it are simple logic gate functions. An
actual operating computer is many years away, if at all.

> I think at least better than TOKAMAK..., somebody told me it is also
> hot...

In other words, there might be funding for it now, but don't count on it
lasting unless there are some major breakthroughs soon.

> but I am really not sure if it is better or not than nano technologies,

Right now, there's a lot of money available. My alma mater just erected
a new building for it, but I've seen this sort of thing before. Once in
a while, a certain field emerges as the one that everybody should be
involved with. There's a lot of enthusiasm, accompanied by
corresponding attention in the news media. Gradually, it fades away,
especially when the promises that were made about it don't come to pass
as predicted. Funding drops off and, soon, there's hardly anyone left
working in it.

>
> while for medical physics, they said I can get lot money with it in
> US, is that so ?
>

Possibly. I live in Canada and I have no idea about what that field is
like elsewhere.
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

Neither field is mainstream yet and either couldnt not make to
commercial success.
However the core fields of computing devices and medical physics will
be strong
for some time. Just keep up skills in the core fields as well.
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better .. 

Rick,

You are right, the most improtant is core skill.
For the medical physics, I was told there would be carbon nanotube,
material physics, imaging and related opportubities into clinical and
industiral fields
while for the quantum computer, as I saw, there are technologies
invoving photonics, ion trap, semiconductor and more basical areas of
quantum physics.
Frankly, I preferred quantum computer because it is interesting and
sounds challenging, but now I am changing to medical phyics with nano
sciences, mainly for the skills inside it, more practical or more
helpful for a wider career...
 >> Stay informed about: Medical physics or quantum computing? Which one is better ..