Physiciens

0,6% (Risque Minimal)

Risque Minimal (0-20%) : Les professions dans cette catégorie ont une faible probabilité d'être automatisées, car elles exigent généralement une résolution complexe de problèmes, de la créativité, de solides compétences interpersonnelles et un haut degré de dextérité manuelle. Ces emplois impliquent souvent des mouvements de main complexes et une coordination précise, rendant difficile pour les machines de reproduire les tâches requises.

Plus d'informations sur ce que représente ce score et comment il est calculé sont disponibles ici.

Sondage utilisateur

Sentiment

Le graphique suivant est inclus chaque fois qu'il y a un nombre substantiel de votes pour rendre les données significatives. Ces représentations visuelles affichent les résultats des sondages utilisateurs au fil du temps, fournissant une indication significative des tendances de sentiment.

Salaires

Très bien rémunéré par rapport à d'autres professions

En 2023, le salaire annuel médian pour 'Physicists' était de 155 680 $, soit 74 $ par heure.

'Physicists' ont été payés 223,9% de plus que le salaire médian national, qui était de 48 060 $

Salaires au fil du temps

Commentaires

Leave a comment

Anonymous (Faible) 17 days ago

Honestly, robots only have have so much processing power, and with today’s tech, (and possibly tomorrow’s) it’s just not possible to run such complex calculations.

0 0 Reply

E (Aucune chance) 20 days ago

Physics requires complex models and creativity that artificial intelligence can not replicate without a human mind.

0 0 Reply

Oliver Cavendish 24 days ago

differentiating between experimental and theoretical physicists, i think that there is a chance that experimental physics will be replaced by automation in the near future especially as nuclear engineering also comes under this bracket and the militaries of major world powers such as America, China and India are looking to incorporate more cyber-warfare and robotics into their offensive (and defensive) technologies and there is also a high chance that as other fields like chemistry, for example, begin to get automated, experimental physics will too. but theoretical physics, on the other hand, is the purest discipline of science there is. it requires originality, innovation, creativity, fun, a genuine interest in science and physics for its own sake and the ability to make coherent theories and hypotheses based on observations and data gathered of and from natural phenomena. this, at least in the near future, is something that AI is thoroughly incapable of doing. so on the whole, no, theo.physicists' shouldn't be going anywhere; exp.physicists on the other hand..............unless, of course, elon surprises us again with a sentient AI that can actually take over everything and become the next SkyNet!

1 1 Reply

Saket (Faible) 4 months ago

I think that robots will not be able to find new things as of right now they can only use a database and find things out of there a robot doesnt have enough creativity to look out into space for example and think"Hmm why is it moving" for something htat shouldnt move it is just gonna see it and be like"cool"

1 0 Reply

Samik Yanque Amable (Aucune chance) 4 months ago

A pure science is a kind of art where your creativity must shine to observe problems and devise solutions. The truth is, it hurts to think that my future will be filled with the anxiety of "finding a problem" that is relevant to science, but it's the hell I chose.

If any junior reads this message, I can only wish you the best. While your work is irreplaceable by AI, your future will be filled with problems where AI cannot assist you. Good luck.

2 0 Reply

Alec 3 months ago

Thank you. I am 12, and this is my dream job. Seeing this message really made me excited!

2 1 Reply

9 (Aucune chance) 11 months ago

We teach AI. That's how it understands. Although it can learn, it can't accumulate pure factual knowledge by itself.

0 0 Reply

Jamie (Très probable) 1 year ago

Hard science fields will be the easiest fields for AI to take-over.

0 2 Reply

MainEditor 7 months ago

But if AI can do hard science why it wouldn't as easy do soft science?

1 0 Reply

Zuzia (Modéré) 1 year ago

AI can already teach itself new things and it escalates very quickly, it probably will be able to analyze all the knowledge we have on Earth and come to some important conclusions.

1 0 Reply

Samuel (Aucune chance) 1 year ago

It requires thinking outside the box, solving new problems, writing new programs. It has already implemented computers for calculations.

0 0 Reply

Toast (Aucune chance) 1 year ago

Being a physicist requires, at least to a certain degree, being able to come up with purely original ideas, rather than interpolating the existing body of knowledge.

2 0 Reply

Quarked_Out (Faible) 1 year ago

Hmm, a lot of areas in physics do incorporate ML techniques and AI to some degree. However, people with physics training play an undisputedly dominant role in research.

If anything, I can see some simulation aspects or redundant experimental procedures being automated in the near term. But parts that incorporate creative problem solving or the physical intuition needed in determining directions to take research are things that are pretty safeguarded to humans for a bit.

I think those "intuitions" are very difficult to map to general problem-solving algorithms.

0 0 Reply

Brian (No Chance) 1 year ago

Many other experimental physicists and I already automate every measurement we can, but there is still plenty of work to do.

1 0 Reply

David (Aucune chance) 2 years ago

I wonder what all those people were thinking when they said there was a realistic possibility that physicists will be obsolete in 20 years. That's absurd on its face and every physicist I have ever met would agree.

We can have a discussion on whether it is possible in the next 200 years, sure, but 20 years? That's laughable. Given that only physicists are qualified to write, train, and optimize the algorithms that would be used to replace them, it will take a long, long, long time.

I suspect that we would need true machine sentience before we could actually start to talk about replacing theoretical and mathematical physicists.

0 0 Reply

Bimsara Bodaragama (Aucune chance) 2 years ago

It's more about intuition and innovativeness. Of course, we will use more tools, but with Physics, since we interpret as we observe (there is a little problem with that conclusion, though), AI may not be able to take it over.

0 0 Reply

Wesley I (Aucune chance) 3 years ago

I believe that it will be possible but not for a very long time, the process of positing new questions and then solving them is rather complex and I'm guessing that it will be at least 100 years before the jobs of theoretical physicists start to become threatened.

0 0 Reply

just bored (Aucune chance) 3 years ago

Even though computers may get more intelligent than us humans, there is still a very small chance because computers don't have the basic questioning ability which we humans have

0 0 Reply

Rowan (Incertain) 3 years ago

The development of AI is rapidly improving, AI maybe 10 years in the future being able to predict or understand the universe better through random generation or pure knowledge is very probable. However I doubt they will replace Physicists in the near decade it should be very increasingly possible.

0 0 Reply

rafel 3 years ago

We are users of AI to improve some calculations and we need robots and AI for experimental precision and performance. Until the singularity, we will be in charge.

0 0 Reply

Pinaki Patra 3 years ago

A huge section of theoretical physicists do algorithm based research, which can easily be replaced by automation.
However, Philosophy based theoretical research is difficult to be replaced.

0 0 Reply

Physics Boi (Faible) 3 years ago

Doubt it, anyway we need physicists to understand what the AI is discovering anyway

0 0 Reply