/sci/ - Science & Math

>want to become a phd in psychology
>realise that entire field is just pretty obvious stuff obfuscated with scientific language
>become totally disillusioned
I still want to become a scientist but not in psychology. What can I do? Is it over?

>>7257797
>>7255373
>topology replaces analysis
>analysis and topology are similar
I want to shoot myself when I hear such statements. I can't believe anyone who completed, or fuck it, is half-way through a graduate analysis sequence would ever say nonsense like that. All that mumbo-jumbo about normal spaces, Tietze's theorem and Urysohn's lemma, Tychonoff's theorem, fundamental groups, paracompactness, second-countability or nets that you cover in a basic topology course just doesn't matter in analysis (complex, functional, pdes). Sure, the concepts come up sometimes when we really need to work with some obscure topology on a function space, but I feel this is out of necessity, not convenience. Chances are that your favourite analysis reference book doesn't even mention half of the theorems I listed above.

On the other hand, topology is particularly useful for geometers, and should be thought by a geometer.

>>7177966
please stop

Suddenly everyone on /sci/ has a phd