Confused Scientist: Where do I fit in? Strategy Consulting, Venture Capital, et al.

Ok trying to start a very open-ended "I'd like to learn more about the underlying structures of the financial industry" type discussion, and part personal advice; I'm trying to figure out where I can fit in 'finance' but work on things I find interesting.

I'm trying to figure out what to focus on (what skills, industry, employment, etc.) but I realize I really don't know much about banking or management consulting, or how they interconnect with other industries.

1. *Me: I am a scientist - ok I've realized I shouldn't claim the 'scientist' label as I don't have a PhD; so - science-person? - (astrophysics and biochemistry, UG + 2 MS degrees, published) interested in analyzing new science/tech innovations, quant/qual trends, studying new markets, and working on valuing very early-stage technologies or companies. I'm also very interested in helping develop new technology directly (but I'm not an engineer and have less interest in working in software/hardware/IT directly, though I do like technology management and working with engineers).

2. My belief has always been that some sort of venture-capital related role would put me in the right environment (I see it as pure VC (e.g. working at a VC firm etc.) and VC-related (e.g. working in technology commercialization, IP valuation, corporate VC, and a bunch of other things that I at least perhaps wrongly associate with the same type of work.).

3. I also know that working in either VC or VC-related type roles are extremely competitive, though I don't find that answer especially enlightening. Traditionally, I understand that those in IB and sometimes consulting often see PE/VC as a 'higher level' version of what they do already, and so it's often considered a terminal industry/employment goal for them.

And yet I'm not convinced what I want to work on has that much semblance to IB. Fewer and fewer people who work in the venture-area are bankers by background, and many increasingly seem to be engineers, technology management and even strategy consulting types. Most of the VCs I know opine that this has a lot to do with the fact that VC is just not a very quantitative-intensive area and many investment decisions are more strategic/trend based (which lends itself perhaps better to those already working in technology or consulting type thinking) than high-level financial modeling, FO IBD and the complex M&A work they traditionally do.

In early-stage VC, many companies barely have any revenues, so I've had senior VCs tell me there just isn't that much "finance" involved that isn't quite basic.

But that's anecdotal.

4. I'm more fuzzy on the Consulting connection. I have a fairly hand-waving understanding of the various works that Management Consulting people do, so I suppose I wonder if perhaps this might be a place I'd enjoy working or not, and whether indeed it would be a good place to start in terms of what I want to do. It does seem many innovation/technology/VC types do often have some consulting-DNA. But I just don't know enough about this.

5. I know it's long and tedious, but if anyone has any idle completely non-rigorous thoughts or observations on where new science/technology, strategy, consulting, and finance intersect, I'd love to read what they have to say as I think about longer-term career plans, and what to pursue.

6. I guess it really all comes down to this: I want to work in finance, but only if it involves science, technology, and new innovations in those industries. I'd be ok working in finance for awhile without it but, eventually, if it doesn't come back to letting me read/write/analyze/model/discuss/opine on science/technology directly, then I wouldn't want to do that. I'm trying to figure out how possible that endpoint is, and how people, a priori, go about doing that?

Thanks in advance!