Simulation Engineer

SIMULATION ENGINEER — ROLE INTAKE [Date: 05/26/2026]

WHAT GOOD LOOKS LIKE

The ideal candidate is a simulation or computational physics engineer who has spent time in an adjacent industry — gaming, entertainment, visual effects, aerospace structures or propulsion — and is hungry to apply high-performance simulation skills to physical robotics for the first time. They have strong physics intuition, not just coding ability. They can look at a simulation result and immediately know if it makes physical sense, which is how they debug quickly rather than chasing ghosts. They write clean, optimized code — not just functional code. They are not a researcher. They have shipped something that ran in production or was used by others. They are willing to take below-market cash for significant founding equity because they believe in what they are building. If they have led a team before, they are director-caliber here.

MUST-HAVES

• Strong computational geometry and physics simulation fundamentals — must be able to debug simulation outputs on physical intuition alone, not just code tracing
• High-performance computing mindset — code optimization is a core expectation, not a nice-to-have; the simulation has to run fast, not just accurately
• Hands-on builder — must be able to write simulation systems from scratch, not just inherit and extend existing codebases
• Ability to operate in an extremely fast-paced, high-intensity, milestone-driven environment without structure or process handed to them
• Onsite availability in Menlo Park full time

NICE-TO-HAVES

• Mechanical engineering background or equivalent physics intuition — understanding of FEA, MPM (material point method), or equivalent analytical frameworks is a strong signal; helps debug simulation fidelity quickly
• Experience with soft body deformation and contact mechanics — as opposed to rigid body only; this is directly relevant to manipulation tasks involving food, tissue, or deformable objects
• Background from gaming, VFX, or entertainment simulation (Pixar, Disney Imagineering, Valve, Roblox, Unreal Engine team, ANSYS) — undervalued talent pool with directly transferable skills
• Aerospace simulation background (SpaceX, propulsion or structures analysis) — Rishu cited specific knowledge transfer potential from aerospace to robotics simulation
• Open source contributions or publicly released software packages — cited in candidate review as high signal for someone who builds things that others actually use
• Prior trajectory toward robotics — Disney to Roblox to Nvidia arc cited as a "clear trajectory" that signals intent even without robotics on the resume

AUTO-DISQUALIFIERS

• Pure rigid body simulation background with no interest in soft body or contact manipulation — vehicle dynamics, crash simulation, aerodynamics without deformable body experience not relevant to dexterous manipulation tasks
• Researchy profile focused on publishing rather than shipping — no subsidizing research with VC money; this was stated explicitly by Rishu
• Background from Cruise — called out by name as low bar
• Background from Google Moonshot Factory, Project X, or Intrinsic Robotics — described as too research-focused, not product-oriented
• 1x backgrounds — evaluate case by case with Rishu before submitting; most strong engineers have already left
• Any candidate whose primary motivation appears to be chasing the AI-to-robotics trend for compensation rather than mission
• Candidates who require high base salary and are unwilling to take significant equity — this is the wrong stage for them

TARGET PROFILE

Target companies: Figure (top tier cited explicitly), SpaceX (simulation team — structures, prop, or aerodynamics analysts open to robotics pivot), Disney Imagineering, Pixar, Valve, Roblox (simulation engineers specifically — not all roles), ANSYS (engineers who want real-world application of their models), Nvidia (robotics-trajectory candidates specifically — the Disney-Roblox-Nvidia arc was flagged as ideal), Unreal Engine team, other VFX / game engine companies with high-performance simulation work

Avoid sourcing from: Cruise, Google Moonshot / Project X, Intrinsic Robotics, 1x (case by case with Rishu), Bot Company (Cruise talent pipeline concern)

Target titles: Simulation Engineer, Computational Physicist, Graphics Engineer (simulation-focused), Game Engine Developer (physics / simulation track), FEA / CAE Engineer (if pivoting from aerospace or automotive), Research Scientist only if clearly transitioning to applied / product work

Target backgrounds and career paths: PhD in computer graphics, computational physics, or mechanical engineering plus 1-2 years industry is acceptable. Non-PhD with 4-5 years direct industry simulation experience is preferred. The Disney-Roblox-Nvidia or ANSYS-Roblox arc is an explicitly identified target path. SpaceX simulation engineers pivoting to robotics.

Experience range (years): PhD plus 1-2 years industry minimum on academic side. Non-PhD: 4-5 years hands-on. New grad not appropriate for this role.

HOW TO EVALUATE QUICKLY

• Ask them to describe the last simulation system they built from scratch — not inherited, not extended. What was the physics problem, how did they validate it, and what did they optimize? If they can't describe a clean from-scratch build, they are likely an integrator, not a builder.
• Ask how they debug a simulation that looks wrong visually. The right answer involves physical intuition — they should be able to describe how they sanity-check outputs against expected physical behavior before they touch the code. A candidate who jumps straight to code tracing without a physics-first instinct is a flag.
• Ask what draws them to robotics and dexterous manipulation specifically. Rishu's explicit concern is candidates who are trend-following the AI-to-robotics wave. The right answer references the physical real-world impact of simulation — wanting to see their models drive real behavior, not live on a screen.

CULTURE FIT

Looking for: Mission-driven people who have stayed hungry inside slow industries and are ready to apply their skills at full speed. People who give daily updates without being asked. People who see a blocked path and unblock it themselves. People who are comfortable with ambiguity, comfortable with intensity, and not looking for process to be handed to them. Engineers who want their work to matter in the physical world.

Avoid: Researchers. People who want to work on "the most exciting thing" all the time rather than doing what needs to get done. People who have only worked in structured environments with clear handoffs and defined scope. Anyone who treats equity conversations as secondary and cash negotiations as primary.

BOTTOM LINE — SEND

Send a candidate for this role if they have built simulation systems from scratch — not integrated, not extended — with strong physics intuition evidenced by how they talk about debugging. The ideal profile has spent time in entertainment, gaming, or aerospace simulation and is clearly hungry to apply those skills to real robotics in the physical world. They may be underpaid and under-stimulated in their current role. They talk about the mission before they ask about salary. Their career trajectory, even if not in robotics yet, is clearly pointing toward it. They are available to be in Menlo Park full time and understand what pre-seed intensity means. They are not asking for $150k in base.

BOTTOM LINE — DO NOT SEND

Do not send a candidate who has only done rigid body simulation in automotive or pure aerodynamics without interest in deformable contact mechanics. Do not send researchers with thin industry experience who are more focused on publishing than shipping. Do not send anyone from Cruise or Google Moonshot. Do not send anyone whose first questions are about work-from-home flexibility, compensation ceiling, or title trajectory before they have asked a single question about the technology. Do not send anyone who has only extended existing simulation frameworks and has never built one from scratch. Do not send anyone who cannot commit to full-time onsite in Menlo Park.

BUSINESS CONTEXT

Why this role exists now: Silicon Dreams' entire technical thesis — compressing millions of years of physical pre-training into months using high-fidelity, high-performance simulation — depends on this hire. The simulation stack is the core enabler. Without it, the MVP demo cannot be built and the seed fundraise cannot happen. Two-month MVP deadline makes this P0.

Success at 6 months: Not specifically defined in this intake — raise at first weekly sync. Implied: simulation system built and running on commercial off-the-shelf robot arms, demonstrating the guacamole preparation task with sufficient fidelity to pitch seed investors.

Success at 12 months: Not specifically defined in this intake — raise at first weekly sync. Implied: simulation stack generalized enough to train across multiple dexterous manipulation tasks, informing custom hardware design in the seed phase.

Where this role fits in the org: Founding engineer reporting directly to Rishu. Two-person technical core on simulation right now (Rishu and one U Michigan engineer). This hire would be the senior simulation voice on the team and may eventually lead the simulation function.

ROLE-SPECIFIC SELLING POINTS

Why this role vs similar roles at other companies: Simulation engineers at Roblox, Nvidia, ANSYS, and entertainment companies are building things that live digitally. Here, the simulation directly trains robots doing physical tasks in the real world. The feedback loop is immediate and the stakes are real. No other company is doing this full vertical loop at this stage.

Unique scope, impact, and growth opportunity: Founding engineer role means architectural ownership from day one. The candidate will define the simulation methodology, not inherit it. Direct line to the founder on every decision. Equity stake at founding-level percentages.

What candidates consistently get excited about: Hypothesis not yet validated — first submissions will surface this. Expected driver: the prospect of seeing simulation work manifest in physical robot behavior solving real problems. This is not a "ship a game update" job.

Growth path / what's on the table in 12-18 months: Director or team lead title if the candidate has team leadership experience — Rishu stated explicitly. For candidates without leadership history: founding engineer with clear path to leading the simulation team as the company scales post-seed.