As noted by several people, most recently JoAnne Hewett, one of the players at the final table of the World Series of Poker Main Event is a Ph.D. physicist: Michael Binger, recently of SLAC. So, I guess we need to expand the list of non-academic physics careers to include "professional poker player." I'm not sure how Prof. Katz left it off his list.
JoAnne quotes from his bio:
Michael Binger hopes to continue doing research in physics without having to run the rat-race of getting a job and impressing all the right people as he puts it. A win here at the World Series of Poker Main Event would definitely give him the freedom to do pretty much anything he wants.
This is one of the few areas where theorists have a clear advantage over experimentalists. The top prize for the tournament is something like $12 million, which would set a theorist up for life. An experimentalist, though, could burn through that in two, three years tops, even in a relatively cheap field like AMO physics...
Did you know that $12 million could fund the entire NSF budget for theoretical computer science for two years! Yep, us theorists are bargains. Of course are existence is justified by experimentalists.
BTW, I'd rather play against theorists any day. They often take a few of the world that all that matters are the odds, which, in no-limit holdem, is certainly a great way to lose a lot of money. Of course I'm sure I'd never want to play poker with Michael Binger.
FWIW, I know two of the guys that were on the MIT blackjack playing team and they both are experimentalists.