Physicists

Its the last job that'll get taken over; if it does, we're not working anyways

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.

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.

I am a PhD physicist and i am not noticing any robots in my physics department

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!

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

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"

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.

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.

Quite a niche field that requires a lot of originality with really high level math in many cases.

An ai can’t find anything new, it just bases off of information that we already have however physicists are constantly discovering new things

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

It is scientifically proven that the human brain is MUCH more complicated than any AI, and it is very hard for AI to ask a question and solve it on their own, so I think AI stands no chance on taking over the complex job of science.