/sci/ - Science & Math

Lol imagine being this mad about imaginary math unironically

>>12086739
This
Engineers seem to be doing pretty fine regardless of their inferior math skills in today's society, so even if they aren't up to the OPs titanic standards, there really isn't any harm except Weltschmerz.

i wish undergrads weren't allowed to post here

>>12086710
I literally had to take a class on electromagnetism for my EE major, wtf are you going on about?

>>12086710
I’ve done the same, I know the general degree plan for all the major STEM degrees at the T-20 schools, as well as European universities. It’s really funny watching people lie and LARP as these well rounded polymaths when I know they haven’t even taken above freshman math.

>>12086748
That's another thing. My next favorite LARP behind the "EEs have to take proof-based complex analysis and EM field theory/CS majors have to take combinatorics and algebra!" is the Europoor larp where European math majors pretend like they have to take classes on functional analysis and lie algebras in their second year of undergrad.

Then you realize that was all a complete lie, lol. And that languages like German and Dutch don't have words for "calculus", so it all gets called analysis. They pretend that their "analysis" class they take in the first year is at the level of Big Rudin or Folland.

>>12086710
>EEs to take electromagnetic field theory
what exactly is that? i go to a shitty state uni and i have to take two classes called "electricity and magnetism" and "electromagnetism"

>>12086747
>>12086762
Yes, and you didn't even learn the differential form of Maxwell's equations. Let alone the multipole expansion, green's functions, field tensors, solutions to laplace's equation, etc that physics majors are expected to know.

>>12086769
every single EE I know had to take at least griffith's level of electrodynamics, and this is at one of the schools you listed above

>>12086787
No, you didn't.

>>12086795
>telling me about my own experience
is this a meme? I'm not an EE but my EE acquaintances used griffiths

>>12086796
They were EE/physics double majors, or physics minors. Griffiths is not required for any EE program in the country.

>>12086796
>>12086787
Do you think that we don't know how to look this shit up? Fucking lol

https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6-013-electromagnetics-and-applications-spring-2009/syllabus/

https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6-641-electromagnetic-fields-forces-and-motion-spring-2005/syllabus/

http://web.mit.edu/6.014/www/course_info.pdf

https://ee.stanford.edu/admissions/bs

I can do the same thing for every other university on the planet. Literally any program at any university I can look up exactly what classes the average student will take during undergrad. It is fucking embarrassing making shit up and puffing yourself up as if you are better educated than you actually are especially in extremely difficult fields like physics and math where people work their asses off just to keep up.

It's not even fucking close when you look at GRE scores there's a massive qualitative difference between doing physics or math and literally everything else:

https://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide_table4.pdf

Keep in mind this test is much more g-loaded than the average undergraduate class and certainly than the SAT, this is the best possible objective measure of quantitative differences in relevant cognitive performance between these fields.

>>12086710
>>CS majors don't take classes in combinatorics, graph theory, and abstract algebra
wait what? Combinatorics and algebra were required for mine, and while graph theory was an elective, its applications were heavily featured across every CS class I took.
Granted I also double majored in CS and math, but these were just my CS requirements
>Nobody short of EE/math double majors is taking a class in proof-based complex analysis
>EE's taking proper complex analysis
lmao I don't think EE's ever learn about singularity analysis and meromorphic functions

Anyway OP your undergrad is showing.

>>12086710
>Yet in order to try and prove that they are good at math and physics, all these brainlet majors claim that they know these things, took the classes, and that only those who went to "shit schools" didn't. Well, I looked up all the requirements for EEs, MEs, CS, etc at Harvard, MIT, Carnegie Mellon, Caltech, and Stanford. You know how many of them required CS brainlets to take abstract algebra or EEs to take electromagnetic field theory?
0
I learned it at age 23. I have all Abstract Algebra, Probability, Graph Theory (Dover book) laid around my study room and I constantly study them on top of having (((day job)))

>>12086710
Well you also have to take UL courses in another major. Usually that's math so 3-4 serious math courses by the end of a CS degree (usually more).

>>12086710
OPs mad he's stuck as a HS math teacher while his EE chad friend's are making 4x what he does

>>12086844
>wait what? Combinatorics and algebra were required for mine
Combinatorics is plausible, but not algebra. CS major "combinatorics" classes are a fucking joke in any case. You learn what a binomial coefficient is, lol. Versus the combinatorics classes for math that require advanced algebraic and analytic methods.

How was algebra? I bet your learned what a group was. Or even a monoid. You know, CS people think basic definitions of what a "monoid" is, is really advanced math that makes them very smart (the entire Haskell community).

See this is the problem I have. Even when you have these classes, they're nothing like the versions actual math and physics people have to take. You think your shit versions of combinatorics and algebra are worth anything, lol. The sad part is some schools make math majors take these brainlet classes for 3 years along with CS and engineering morons before getting to analysis and algebra. Wasting time they could have spent on real mathematics.

>>12086710
Cool story bro

Now I need some advice, as an EE major my uni forces me to pick betwin Discrete Math and Complex Analysis. I am leaning towards Discrete Math because I think I like it more (it sounds more interesting) and also because I think Complex Analysis will be the same things we did in Analysis but with complex numbers (sounds boring). What should I choose?

we used jackson in our EE electromagnetics course but it is an elective. most EEs didnt go into the speciality that required it. no need to be an autist about it

>>12086892
Monoid? Haskell?

At least half of those """functional""" retards will probably say "you probably meant monad?" if asked about monoids.

>>12086758
Massive cope
A quick look at any degree program would show you that its true

>>12086769
Who gives a fuck. Physicists sit around staring at their navel all day, learning trivia for sake of trivia, and having fun being wrong about everything right after promising a big breakthrough. Those engineers learn 50 year old math, spending as little time in autism land as possible, and turn it into literally everything you take for granted in your pathetic and useless parasitic life. Go ahead and feel superior. You will never make anything of real use. You might eventually write a paper that ten people read, and promptly forget about as they jump to the next new trivia.

>>12087040
It isn't true at any of the universities I have looked at other than Oxford's math program where they are allowed to take Functional Analysis as an undergraduate course. Keep in mind this is the best university in the world outside of America.

>>12087069
heres the degree plan at my uni (TU Dresden)
functional analysis is in 5. semester (not second year to be fair)

>>12087069
You do take functional analysis on my uni during undergrad. Namely analysis 6.

>>12086769
Jesus fuck kill yourself dude.
This is like screaming at a physics major because he doesn't do power flow calculations or doesn't know how to program a plc or whatever, absolutely retarded and childish.

Btw I'm an EE and math double major so get flexed on sperg

>>12086841
>there's a massive qualitative difference between doing physics or math
First of all, that looks like a load of shit, when physics has higher means than math in verbal reasoning and writing, when physicists can't write for shit nor understand anything without a dogshit analogy.
Also, math and physics are both worse than humanities in verbal reasoning and analytical writing. I have no idea what point your trying to demonstrate with that.

>>12086892
>>12087038
Why would monoids be relevant for them in any case? Apart from making some proofs in group and ring theory slightly easier, and being a more complete mathematician, why does anyone care about monoids?
Also, almost all math undergrads would also not know what a monoid is.

>>12086866
But a least he knows more math than him.

>>12087135
Math and Physics have the highest mean scores of all the STEM majors you fucking brainlet, it's easy to see with a quick glance at the table. They dwarf CS, Chem, Bio and Eng.
>>12087091
>>12087135
Isn't third year the final year at your school? The strongest math undergrads in America take graduate level courses their final year, which is the fourth year or senior year here, like functional analysis.

>>12087389
You said there was a massive difference between them and literally everything else. Stop shifting the goalposts.
It is marginal if even existent compared to Chem eng, materials, chemistry, economics and Earth, atmospheric and marine science. Their scores certainly don't dwarf any of those subjects, and in some areas their scores are lower (in verbal reasoning and analytical writing).
I have no idea why you're calling me a brainlet when you can't even read scores off a table.
In any case, your post has nothing to do with what I wrote (concerning the table), which was that humanities majors score better than physics and math in VR and AW.

>>12086710
none of that stuff is of any value to employers.

>>12087143
>why does anyone care about monoids?
Because monoids are categories with one object. Monoidal categories are everywhere. Symmetric Monoidal Categories are used in TQFT.

>>12087888
Checked, and thank you.

>>12086841
Because engineers are able to get a job without having to go to (((graduate school)))

>LOL stoopid math and physics nerds, didn't you know that engineering and CS ppl have to take all the math and physics you do? xD We have to learn grad level E+M, analytic and algebraic combinatorics, real and complex analysis, and analytical mechanics just to get a bachelor's degree! If you disagree, you went to a community college!
"No, you don't. Literally no university on the planet requires that for undergrad engineering and computer science. Is Harvard a community college? What about Stanford, or MIT? Stop lying, retard."
>ok fag xD well at least I'll be the next Elon Musk (physics major btw), because I'm gonna make a billion dollars a year working as a code monkey/designing screws/basic circuits in solidworks/verilog for the rest of my life! Totally not going to just make 80k a year as a cubicle slave while management gets paid more than me! Enjoy starbucks virgin :DD I totally know grad level math and physics btw :) BTW what are monoids, measures, lie algebras, lagrangians, green's functions, etc?

And you wonder why math and physics people fucking hate engineers and CS idiots. It's because you are extremely obnoxious and delude yourselves into thinking you are good at math and physics and smarter than you actually are. Then when you get called out you say "OK NERD XDDD WELL I'LL BE THE NEXT BILL GATES/ELON MUSK/ETC!" when disproportionately many of those tech billionaires were math and physics majors. No, you'll end up a cubicle slave for 75k a year in a high cost of living area with dreams of grandeur.

Kill yourselves.

CS AND ENGIKEKS ABSOLUTELY BTFO HOLY SHIT

>>12086710
>>12088583
Calm down bro. I'm a mathchad but I don't seethe like this at engifags or CSniggers. I just post pic related for CS, and some variation of
>dilate
>cope
>seethe
>kys
>suck BBC
etc. for engineers.

Any body have a proof for this question?
If n is a natural number there does not exists a solution to the following (n-1)^3 + (n)^3 = (n+1)^3. Prove using the properties of the natural numbers

>>12086710
>>12088583
mostly correct but
Ecole Polytechnique in France requires analysis for engineers.
California Institute of Technology requires Combinatorics and Graph Theory (Math 6a) for CS

>>12086835
>>12086800
>caltech EE 151: Fundamentals of >Electromagnetic Theory
>topics: Maxwell's equations
>books: Griffiths Electrodynamics

yeah OP, you really proved me wrong! I'm not talking out of my ass, I know what fucking experience I had you absolute retard.
> It is fucking embarrassing making shit up and puffing yourself up as if you are better educated than you actually are especially in extremely difficult fields like physics and math where people work their asses off just to keep up.
why are you so mad? because I go to a school that you dream of going to? interesting

>>12089908
Took 2 seconds to disprove you, retard. It's a class on circuits with some Maxwell's equations thrown in. Here's the one for proper physics majors that actually uses Griffiths:

https://www.astro.caltech.edu/~golwala/ph106bc/

I don't care about the prestige of your undergrad, fucking moron. It's because that's all you can fall back on. What was your GPA and course selection, dumbfuck? After all, someone that went to Harvard and got a BS with a 3.2 and only took the bare minimum will be much worse than someone that went to a state university, did research, and took graduate classes. Admissions committees and employers agree with me. It's the engineers and CS tards that are obsessed with prestige (granted, much more important for graduate school) and wowed by names.

Not one college I have heard requires EE majors to take classes in E+M at the level of Griffiths, let alone Jackson. But I hear people like you LARP about it all the time! Interesting.

>>12086710
At my school we take a class that covers basic proofs , counting , inductive proofs , and graph theory. We also have more advanced classes that are electives but you need to take two and those include more advance graph theory , probability and numerical methods.

>>12089941
>took 2 seconds to disprove me
>"Maxwell's equations" very clearly printed on the image you attached
are you forgetting what I originally said? because you literally just proved me right. glad you figured it out for yourself, though!
if I was still an undergrad I'd login to my course website and show you what the required readings were but I no longer have access. but I know as a fact my EE friends used griffiths.
>let alone Jackson
that's because not even physics majors take Jackson as an undergrad. I'm a physicist and I never took Jackson. instead I did grad quantum and QFT before graduating.

Funny how all these cucks pretend like they went to some magical elite college where EEs take EM out of Griffiths and CS majors are all required to study abstract algebra and galois theory, and if you disagree "you went to a community college". Even though you look up the requirements or course list at any of these places, NOT A SINGLE FUCKING ONE of them requires more than the calc sequence, linear algebra, differential equations, and maybe some "discrete math"/basic combinatorics/basic probability.

I guess MIT, Harvard, Cambridge, and Stanford must all be hiding their secret graduating requirements and syllabuses! I bet they lie and only the super-geniuses that study there are told the real syllabi, because retards like myself that only went to a community college would feel too inadequate? Stanford engineers only having to calculus, linear algebra (non proof based), and differential equations? No, bro, that's a lie. They're really learning real analysis with measure theory, but you wouldn't understand what goes on at Stanford, you went to a community college after all, bro.

Should I do EE or Physics?

>>12089978
Don't know about the other universities that you mentioned but at Cambridge the professors don't always follow the prescribed textbooks and almost always teach something that's beyond the scope of those textbooks. Of course, we're tested on these new topics in exams.

>>12086710
Which EE/CS chad shit on you to cause this much seethe?

>>12090128
Depends on what you want to do. if you just want a degree and then get a job EE is usually the better route, if you want to get a phd and become a researcher or professor than just look into the research of the two fields at top universities and go for whatever interests you most.

>>12086739
>combinatorics
>imaginary math
come again?

>>12086710
sucks not having a job OP

>op tries to impress us with the fact he won’t be able to get a job

i was studying engineering in europe and in the first year we already had to study baby thermodynamics electo/magneto statics and electrodynamics with wave equation + modern physics
granted we rarely had situations where the integrals were hard to compute like for example when we used gauss law E was always parallel or perependicular to the surface but still it was a lot of work considering we also had to study chemistry mechanics calculus baby linear algebra + labs + a project

I'm an ECE PhD student at a top ten school. Never even took linear algebra. What now nerd? Turns out what I do is actually interesting

>>12091330
Lying is pathetic

>>12091428
cope

>>12091428
According to MIT's degree plan, it is possible to get a undergraduate degree in Course 6 (EE, CS, CE, or CS with Molecular Biology focus) without ever taking linear algebra (18.06 or 18.700). The CS with economics focus option requires linear algbra though. Differential equations is required for all degrees, which would include some linear algebra when discussing systems of differential equations.

>>12086892
I'm the guy you responded to
>but not algebra
My undergrad required me to take at least 1 semester. I took 3 as per math and my interest going into grad school.
>CS major "combinatorics" classes are a fucking joke in any case
The combinatorics requirement was the class in the math department. My advanced algorithms elective had it as a "soft" requirement, and it showed up fairly liberally in the arguments in the class.
>I bet your learned what a group was. Or even a monoid.
...I mean, group theory is standard. We learned up to representation theory (stopping around Schur's lemma), which has immediate, obvious application.
As for monoids...dude are you dense? Introductory automata is largely just questions on semigroups and monoids. It's not hard - the most salient questions from this field are the word problem and maybe the connections to classifying top spaces but that's it.
>they're nothing like the versions actual math and physics people have to take.
I think this is the 4th time I've mentioned that I double majored in math. Speaking from my experience, yes you do see more math majors go for higher academics and aptitude, but my argument is that there isn't much a motivated CS student can't do on their own. I know various people doing research under math and CS professors alike, and they just learn what they want / need on the spot. This is how research goes.
>You think your shit versions of combinatorics and algebra are worth anything, lol
I took these in the math department...as I've said again for the 4th time. Are they 'meaningful' to you now?

Again, your undergrad is really showing. The reason nobody is panicking over this is because
1) everyone who is serious about math or CS theory research learns what they want by themselves
2) everyone who isn't doesn't really want to learn the mathematics.
I know you're trying to make yourself feel better about your choice of degree, but it really doesn't matter in the long run.

>>12086920
> I am leaning towards Discrete Math because I think I like it more (it sounds more interesting)
Discrete math is a great subject, but is oftentimes watered down. It has a lot of applications and is itself a beautiful collection of theories, but I think you should focus on a specific type of discrete math (combinatorics, graph theory, etc.) if you're interested. It's a natural connection between hardware and algorithms, as well as common discretization techniques in signals.
> I think Complex Analysis will be the same things we did in Analysis but with complex numbers (sounds boring)
Since you're in engineering, I figure this is more of a 'complex variables' class where you learn applications of complex analysis. It's valuable to have, and a *lot* of stuff is very intuitive in complex. It doesn't have the same flavor as the reals. If you're interested in circuit theory, further electrostatics, time-harmonic fields, etc., it's a good class to have

>>12086769
wtf? I have done all of that and I'm an EE

>>12092055
Obviously, you don't understand the purpose of this thread. It's not bashing EE, CS, MechE, etc in the slightest or saying these people are stupid. In fact, it is very necessary to have people educated in these disciplines.

What you don't seem to understand is that I am rebutting the idiots that say that they were REQUIRED to take these courses, in undergrad, as part of a STANDARD EE or CS degree. Then when you call them out and explain no college requires this they say "lol maybe at your community college bro!". Even though this is the case at all colleges in America and Western Europe. I never denied that people do double majors or take those as electives, or learn it on their own in graduate school.

Actually, this is a problem with educational standards in general as it turns into a business. Even with a math degree. Why are math majors taking years of baby calculus and then taking a 3 credit hour class on analysis and algebra that don't even include lebesgue integration and galois theory, then awarded a math degree? People like you and me and the other students that wanted to go to graduate school did more, but the bare minimum requirements were fucking pathetic. There is a massive surplus of engineering and CS grads to the actual state of the job market. It would not be a bad idea to ACTUALLY REQUIRE EE undergrads to take higher level EM and MEs to take analytical mechanics to try and prune the better students and guarantee some higher standard of quality.

The entire point is that most EE, ME, and CS people are fucking OBNOXIOUS and think they're good at math and physics and "took all that" when they didn't. It would be like a physics major saying their knowledge of circuits was better than an EE because they took that one "circuits for physicists" class in undergrad. But they don't. And the undergrad CS major thinking they're a category theory expert but not knowing what a monoid is, happens all the time.

>>12087406
The physics and math scores are higher for Quant, Verbal, and Analytical Writing you fucking retard. If you look a much larger proportion of physics and math majors score in the top 90th percentile for quant than any of the eng disciplines as well as CS. The gap in verbal scores between Math and Physics and Philosophy, History, and English are significantly smaller than the abysmal gap in quant scores.

>>12086710
Imagine caring about how much you know in school or what classes you take. Once you get a job, all of that becomes irrelevant and you just use what you actually need to perform that job.

>>12092337
I get the point, though I disagree with this not being about bashing people. It comes off like you're trying to claim ownership to these subjects, even if you're not. Frequently citing GRE scores without context is also pretty inflammatory. For example, they usually lump "intended subject of study" with both PhD and masters students. Math and physics has more PhD students while CS generally has a lot of older masters applicants who want to learn2code. In fact, if you look at the GRE scores of CS applicants who got into CS PhD programs

http://econphd.econwiki.com/guide.htm

You find that CS, Math, and Physics all top the GRE scores. It's clear that the pool of CS people, especially those who want to do higher study as a PhD, aren't nearly as incompetent or lacking in 'innate talent' as you might be suggesting.
I largely agree with the big point to some extent, that undergrad in general has become a way to check off the minimal requirements to say "yeah, I've sort of seen that," but I feel like the only people who care are those who want to learn as much as they can to do research. Sure, that is indeed my route, and I felt the frustration, but schools are well aware of this, and I get the impression they keep it that way because it makes it easier to spot the people who did go above at beyond. In other words, if you notice the double majors taking grad classes in both their subjects, taking classes that aren't as immediately motivated, or taking independent study classes that lead to papers, other interests, etc., that's an easy way for grad schools to scout for people who care.

So it's in their interests to make the baseline, even in math, fairly accessible. I've never met a great math or CS theory

>>12092638
These are from 2002, the score differences are identical between CS and Math and Physics (they’re actually much worse for verbal), and they don’t break down the score distribution. The most startling difference between groups is the percentage of top scoring test takers from Physics and Math compared to all the other categories in STEM. No matter how you try to skew the data there is a clear pattern: Math and Physics majors are qualitatively smarter and better prepared for STEM graduate studies than all the other groups. This is directly causally linked to the vetting process of a physics or math BS, they expect higher performance, greater work loads, and more creativity than CS and Eng. It’s not debateable, it’s not a matter of only grouping specific sub-sets to get what you want out of these testing data. Physics and math includes applied math and experimental physics which are much easier than theoretical physics and pure math. It includes masters degree aspirants, drop outs and people who will be rejected, remember that math programs are perhaps the most selective for graduate school. There is no contest, I don’t know why you think I am presenting this for discussion. I am telling you point blank doing a CS degree even at the best universities on Earth is easier and attracts lower iq people than doing a physics degree even at only above average schools. It is much harder learning to do stat mech than learning data structures and algorithm analysis. Group differences exist, they are mostly genetic, and they have significant consequences for civilization. CS majors. not understanding basic differences between biological systems and statistical fitting is just one of the reasons why it’s important to be wary of stupid people being given too much wealth and too much power.

>>12092656
not him, but
>stat mech
>data structures and algorithm analysis
you're comparing first year courses to stat mech. most physics majors start with thermo, learn it without rigor, and *may* do stat mech down the line of they want to do an elective...at which point it still isn't rigorous as it should be.

You started off with a point but it quickly devolved into "my major is better than your major," and this is done in a lot of arrogance and ignorance.
>requires more creativity
not exactly. I agree that CS is easier on average due to mediocre average programs, but it's absurd to say this among any of the student work you see at showings like Simon's.
Anyway your post is mostly bait, especially the part where you make reference to score distributions without actually answering the original grievance
>" Math and physics has more PhD students while CS generally has a lot of older masters applicants who want to learn2code. In fact, if you look at the GRE scores of CS applicants who got into CS PhD programs"
You haven't answered whether or not the data you value can discern between masters and phd students in CS

>>12086748
In America at least all of these programs are coordinated by ABET so obviously they are going to have extremely similar requirements.
All of the kids posting about their top 10 school are probably 14.

>>12086710
The engineers are busy in the lab actually designing things and making them work.
I'd love to see you flounder in the lab and struggle for 30 minutes figuring out how to turn the oscilloscope on, but we both know you don't have the balls nor the credentials to set foot in there.

>>12092669
Stat mech is required for physics majors what are you talking about. It’s called statistical physics (stat mech), and at my school we have to take it or we can’t graduate lol.

http://web.mit.edu/physics/current/undergrad/major.html

Idk what you’re talking about it being an elective, it isn’t an elective anymore than QM is an elective.

Every aspect of a CS degree is easier than Physics. You don’t need to differentiate masters and phd prospects if you can’t separate applied from pure math or experimental and theoretical physics. The former are much dumber and less competent at higher math than theoretical physics people.

>>12092669
Of course it isn’t rigorous do you know how much math you need to do grad level stat mech and how fucking complicated it gets? Compar Khardar’s book with Reif and Schroeder, obviously you can’t ask undergrads to do that shit. This is like wondering why you don’t make undergrad math majors do harmonic analysis, because it’s fucking complicated and you have to triply filter people to get to the point where they can handle that kind of abstraction.

Math and physics maybe philosophy are in a league of their own everyone knows this doesnt mean u should be a faggot though

>>12086710
>>12086739
this
OP we don't take that shit because it's not valuable for our work.
When machines and other people do most of your job for you, you don't need much.

>look at all those retards not doing my major's requirements
>oy vey
>and making more money because of it
>OY VEY

I'm a cs major and I took them for my math minor - abstract algebra

>>12086710
>implying I didn’t go above and beyond

>>12092835
this

t. BSc. and MSc. in physics

>>12092796
>You don’t need to differentiate masters and phd prospects if you can’t separate applied from pure math or experimental and theoretical physics.
This is the dumbest comparison I've ever heard. A masters and phd are different tracks of actual study and rigor, whereas applied vs pure and experiment vs theoretical are different research focuses.

>>12092796
>calling his introductory thermo proper stat mech
You almost had me there lmao.
The concerns brought up in >>12092802 hold true - real stat mech is something physics undergrad avoids

Nobody could refute the thesis of the OP post, which was that despite LARPers pretending like they supposedly learn all these things at "muh Harvard";

>NO college requires EE majors to take EM at the level of griffiths
>NO college requires CS majors to take abstract algebra and number theory
>NO college requires MechEs to take analytical mechanics

Not Harvard, not MIT, not Stanford, not CMU, not fucking Cambridge. Maybe some place in fucking Eastern Europe or China that doesn't give a fuck about weeding out customers (students) require it, but nowhere in America or Western Europe. And yet, everyone will LARP that their supposedly "elite school" makes them take these classes to get the degree and say:

>well maybe at YOUR shitty state school huh huh huh xD well REAL CS PROGRAMS make you learn number theory, algebra, combinatorics, and real analysis, at the absolute minimum!

I've heard this a million times from fucking idiots all over the internet about why CS is "actually a math degree". Well, no school on the fucking earth requires any of that for an undergraduate degree. They don't even require it for a PhD. It's more likely these people didn't even fucking go to college, and just read about a summary of topics and courses from wikipedia and numberphile and pretended they were Good Will Hunting at MIT- taking all these topics they read about on a meme list.

>>12093002
>They don't even require it for a PhD
Good luck getting into any CS theory program without algebra. I largely agree that many CS programs aren’t that great, but let’s not pretend CS theory isn’t occupied by math majors and CS majors who actually took the relevant classes

Still looking for this magical college where EEs learn complex analysis, CS majors learn number theory and topology, and ChemE majors all learn PDEs.

Oh wait, it doesn't exist. Good for you if you took math and physics classes beyond the requirements. Doesn't mean it was a requirement, and that 99% of students didn't go beyond calc and linear algebra. Most that do will be double majors in math or physics. People bragging about the usage of algebra in CS or complex analysis in EE/CE don't realize that the people doing all that theoretical shit will be the people that did a double major with math/physics and do extremely specialized work, or learned all that stuff in grad school.

>>12092920
My link has more information and makes no attempt to obscure group differences. Both datasets, one which is 16 years older than the other, preceding the explosion in CS enrollment, show the same absolute group differences. I don’t see how pointing out that applied math like computational statistics, modeling, and numerical analysis is easier than Diff Geo and Algebra is somehow unfair. Experimental physics prospects don’t expect to learn complicated mathematical formalisms and are much closer to chem and bio in their mentality and numeracy. It’s only fair if you’re being a cowardly cope ridden faggot to split hairs even more aggressively.
>>12092924
Stat phys is still harder than anything any CS fag will ever be asked to do. There’s a reason the class is notorious for high fail rates and very low class averages on the exams.

>>12093027
>Stat phys is still harder than anything any CS fag will ever be asked to do. There’s a reason the class is notorious for high fail rates and very low class averages on the exams.
We all had to take that in the first semester of CS at Harvard. All the CS students got A's and all the physics virgins failed. Then everyone got hired for Google and Facebook for 300k and all are currently working on machine learning stock trading and quantum computing.

Sorry you went to a community college. Oh, I'm sorry, a state school? Lol! You couldn't understand how it is to be a Caltech CS god. At MIT we had to learn all that in the first couple weeks. Maybe in another life you'll go to Stanford, loser. God it feels amazing to be a Yale alumni!

4 and none of you have sex in 2021

>>12086710
very true lmao just look at the MATHlet C O P E in this thread

>"CS only requires calc and basic probability? heh maybe at your shitty state school, retard! Not at MY school!"
>in reality not even MIT requires more than calc 1 and a "discrete math" class
>to get an associates in math at a community college you need to take calc 3, linear algebra, and differential equations
>so that means a community college math major literally knows MORE math than a CS major from MIT

oh no no no

oh NO NO NO

LMFAO!

SO THIS IS THE POWER OF COMPUTER SCIENCE MAJORS

>i-it's pretty much a math degree

*breathes in*

HAHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHHAAHAHHAHAAHA

*chokes*

OH MY FUCKING GOD ARE YOU KIDDING ME HAHAHHAHAHA

literally worse at math than people from a COMMUNITY COLLEGE!!

>>12093073
MIT isn't a good school you retarded burger

americans are just dumb compared to europeans.

>>12093082
europe isn't a country, tard lol

this is what math and physicsfags do instead of working and making money

just seething on imageboards online

>>12093098
>>12093098
Can you blame them? They literally spent 4+ years and 80 grand to learn about shit that was solved hundreds of years ago.

>>12093042
Kill yourself

>>12093073
You reek of someone who is unemployable and has never stepped foot into the real world. An undergraduate degree in engineering is designed to get companies to hire you. A company wants people with practical skills and experience. No one cares if you specifically studied Griffiths if you go work at Raytheon. They care if you know how to do circuit analysis, if you know the basics of radar employment, if you know how to read tech specifications for relevant data to the product you are building. People who want to go into higher degree from engineering learn more because they want to, not because they have to to understand the material. In ECE, the professors don't care that you know esoteric math that has questionable relevance to your specific area. If I have to learn some math, I learn that specifically for the paper/project I am doing. You are screeching at people who just don't care about what you are saying.

>>12093159
>An undergraduate degree in engineering is designed to get companies to hire you
absolutely nothing I learned in my engineering program was of value to employers.

>>12093159
I honestly don't give a fuck, lol. You retards are the ones that pretend like you had to learn that as part of your degree and that anyone that said you didn't "went to a community college", day in and day out. Now you can't take what people throw back at you.

Pathetic!

>>12093027
>Both datasets, one which is 16 years older than the other, preceding the explosion in CS enrollment, show the same absolute group differences.
...not really. Among them, there is a difference of 30 in their overall score in the 2002 PhD focused dataset. I concede it's from 2002, but I chose it because it's demonstrative of how CS is unfairly represented by people who want to get the masters for codemonkeying. First and foremost
>comparing CS application to applied math
I'm not going to go on and on about which I think is harder, but I am going to say it's bad faith to say CS theory doesn't have its hard mathematics problems, especially given results like MIP* = RE (which answered Connes' embedded and Tsirelson's problem in math and math-phys) or fields like geometric complexity theory, which largely employs geometric invariant theory and actually interesting algebra. The "complicated formalisms" are all there.
>>12093193
I'm honestly okay with all these claims about CS undergrad being half baked, since it has become fairly easy to accommodate so many people. But this implication that actually difficult mathematics and nontrivial results aren't a part of its theory research is annoying. Yes, yes I know blue man muh CS meme, but if somebody actually shows you non-meme results, the undergrads double down with
>hehe, they were actually a mathematician in disguise
>nobody cares about it
>no CS major would ever be able to do this
>lol but my intro data structures was so easy
It's systematic cope for the idea that these hard math results can exist outside of math and physics, or that CS is itself a deep subject worth studying yet still in its infancy.

>>12093237
Nobody said that graduate level researchers in CS don't use advanced mathematics or that there are no CS undergrads that take further mathematics classes (although they are in the extreme minority). What they said were that the LARPers claiming that they needed to take abstract algebra and number theory at their "elite school" to get a CS degree were outright lying and when called out they made the 'muh prestige' argument. Obviously this is false since even MIT and Stanford don't require much mathematics. This is like the fifth time this has been explained to you, and you are so dense I am starting to doubt you even went to college at all.

>>12093254
>Nobody said that graduate level researchers in CS don't use advanced mathematics or that there are no CS undergrads that take further mathematics classes (although they are in the extreme minority).
The posts
>>12092656
>>12092796
>>12093027
All have a clear implication of
>muh physics is better
>CS grads lag behind, even in grad
>CS topics are like numerical analysis - all applied, while pure math and theoretical physics are harder
>CS has no theory or 'complicated mathematical formalism'
He was of course talking about undergrad as well, but since we're talking about GRE and grad admissions, he was largely referring to the fields of study post-undergrad.

>>12093264
Do you think that everyone in this thread, even though they have wildly different prose, are even the same person?

>>12093264
No one owes you respect, this isn’t reddit and we don’t have to be nice to you

>>12093159
I don't care what you got your degree in, idiot. It's simple. Stop fucking boasting about how much math your vocational EE trade degree teaches you, imbecile, and people will stop rightfully calling you out for pretending to be a master of things you don't even have the slightest idea about.

>>12090192
New topics such as? Pay attention everyone, how the CSnigger hides and dodges his way through criticism by vigorous handwaving and vague statements. Too bad they can't dodge their way out of unemployment

>>12093274
Of course not. Do you think every response is exclusively for you?
>>12093279
This isn't about being nice lmao. It's that there's someone in this thread denying that this discussion is even happening. Unless, turning a blind eye contrary evidence is 'not being nice."

>>12093292
>Everyone with an EE degree is one person

>>12093274
You said
>Nobody said that graduate level researchers in CS don't use advanced mathematics
and now you're saying
>Do you think that everyone in this thread, even though they have wildly different prose, are even the same person?
shifting the goalposts here anon

can this incel mathfag just have sex already

>>12092337
Ecole Polytechnique does.

>>12093315
If any one saith, that the marriage state is to be placed above the state of virginity, or of celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be united in matrimony; let him be anathema.

dilate

>>12086710
CS is basically math++ and a CS major is considered élite, capable of mastering in 1 year what would take a math major 2. The world's élite universities (Oxford, Cambridge, Hull) will tell you that as a student you are the best group they have and math students go slower than you and increase your load to crazy levels.

As a CS student, you are expected to master (continuous) calculus, discrete calculus (discrete math proofs, hypercubes for parallel algorithms), optimization (machine/deep learning, compilers), category theory (functional programming), logic (up to automated proofs, i.e. including set theory), differential equations, topology (computational geometry, distributed algorithms), probability and statistics (reinforcement learning, queueing), number theory (cryptography), graph theory (almost everywhere)... There is no functional analysis needed yet, but it's heavily used for PhD degrees anyway. You need to know all this down to the level of proving theorems if you want to achieve anything in CS While pure math & physics progress slowed down, the advances in CS are fast and accelerating. CS is the major of future. Math jobs are shrinking; CS jobs will grow even more than to-day. The AI revolution is here, from Google search to Uber pool to auto correct to recommendation engines, mathematicians are being left in the dust by algorithms from the 90's and just sheer brute force

>>12086920
>I think Complex Analysis will be the same things we did in Analysis but with complex numbers

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

>>12086710
>>CS majors don't take classes in combinatorics, graph theory, and abstract algebra
>>EEs don't take a class in non-baby electrodynamics (at the level of griffiths/schwartz/etc), or complex analysis
>>mechEs don't take a class in lagrangian mechanics
>
>Yet in order to try and prove that they are good at math and physics
what's this shit tier post? are you in high school? CS is a Math MSc tier subject
>>12086739
OP is probably a high schooler retard

>>12093587
>what's this shit tier post? are you in high school? CS is a Math MSc tier subject
LOL! No, it's not.

>>12086710
CS major here and I will be taking both combinatorics and graph theory as well engineering stats next semester smd faggot. I work as a math tutor too.

>>12086710
A fraud takes pride on what he has learned, not what he has made. Like sure no matter what you know, if you can't apply it then it's useless because it's all in your head.
Even the high school drop-out webdevs who program meme frameworks contribute to the modern world more than you ever did, retarded academic.

>>12093644
imagine caring about contributing to this scam of a jewish system

>>12093660
I mean, the literal same can be said of academia.

>>12086710
Programmer here. I got high once and looked at mathematical equations and realized I got suckered into doing math anyways. My Dad was a mathematican and got blackballed by academia so I always avoided academia and went into programming (self-taught) to avoid a possible fate like that. Since then I've been studying math to become a better programmer.

CS fags constantly claim that their degree is "basically a math degree". But if you say "no it isn't, math degrees have real analysis, abstract algebra, number theory, etc" they chimp out and do the classic cope which is:

>Well you went to a shit school/community college, idiot! At MY elite university, we had to take real analysis, abstract algebra, number theory, and differential geometry for our computer science program!

This "school" literally only lives in the imagination of prestige-obsessed LARPers that imagine themselves as Good Will Hunting at an Ivy League. I looked up the requirements for CS for ALL the Ivies, MIT, Berkeley, Cambridge, and even top ranked colleges in France, Germany, and Switzerland. There were only a few places that required analysis for CS and they were in Europe and Asia, since they don't have "calculus" classes and force everyone to take the same first year "analysis" class (which is actually halfway between a rote calculus class and a rigorous real analysis class). Other than that, no, especially in America. None of them require abstract algebra, number theory, and all the other high level mathematics CS tards claim a "good program that isn't at a community college" has. NOT A SINGLE FUCKING ONE!

There are ZERO colleges in North America that require CS majors to take any math but linear algebra, calc, and maybe differential equations or "discrete math" (basic combinatorics, divisibility, induction, and finding binomial coefficients for complete retards- aka something that could fit on 3 pages stretched to a semester). These fucking stupid CS niggers literally made this shit up about all the math they had to take when literally none of it is true! It's all a fiction; a fib, invented by LARPing autists that daydream imagining themselves at Harvard, and make up lies about how the """elite""" CS program is actually like.

CS retards:

>I'm so good at math! *snort* I totally love homotopy theory and category theory! You, like, draw the arrows man! Deep!

5 seconds later:

>Wow, monoids? (literally something math majors learn about on the VERY FIRST day of abstract algebra class) This is so deep! You have to be a really smart haskell functional genius like me to know about MONOIDS!

Please, stop pretending like you know about abstract algebra and algebraic topology because it's cool to supposedly know math in your inbred dumbfuck circles. Bunch of worthless fucking fraudulent niggers. Instead of pretending like you know grad level math when all you know is calc 2, stick to importing libraries math majors wrote to do basic matrix multiplication before you get replaced by a Pajeet on a visa. It's what you're best at. Go back to your retards' ballpit and stop annoying the big boys while they do physics and pure mathematics.

ITT: coping retards with worthless degrees (math/physics)

This thread forever BTFO all engineers and CS retards holy fucking shit. The only response they can figure out is to claim that mathematics and physics majors dont work which isn't even true lmfao.
Engineers and CS guys are LESS INTELLIGENT than mathematicians and physicists. Just accept it.

>>12093831
Nice strawman.
>>12094658
>Engineers and CS guys are LESS INTELLIGENT than mathemagicians and physishits
Obviously. No reasonable human - which, given how much CS leans left, is quite hard to come by - would argue with that.

>>12094812
Given the state of research, I’m not sure I’m convinced engineers and CS people are less intelligent. At first glance, it looks like you’re comparing engineers in the field to academics with PhDs. If we compare the work of PhD holders, it’s pretty hard to compare given the collaborative and interdisciplinary nature of research.
It doesn’t feel clear cut to me, and I feel like it’s an appeal to circlejerk than any real argument.
>t. PhD student in math-phys studying tqft

>>12094838
>comparing engineers in the field to academics with PhDs
No. Comparing PhD holders in engineering fields to PhD holders in maths/physics. I don't know of a good metric to compare people in the field to academics, or even just people in the field.
In academia, you can compare the grades of students in the courses they shared. For example, in my uni, where maths, CS and physics take the same analysis, lingebra and abstract algebra courses in their first two years of undergrad, physicists and mathematicians consistently outperform CS and they outperform them in courses like introduction to programming (mandatory) too. Further on, during MSc, CS students still get outperformed in every CS course that maths/physics students decide to take and still get outperformed in all the maths/physics courses they decide to take.

>>12094858
>can’t compare academics
>so let’s recall some anecdotes I might have from undergrad
Lmao
>outperformed
At my undergrad, I knew more than a decent amount of math and physics majors who got tripped up at data structures and other introductory classes. It’s funny that you mention programming, given that there was a similar experience there and dedicated programming is literally the first and only course you take for just languages.
It doesn’t really add up.
>they take CS classes in MSc
No, in the US people generally apply straight to their PhD europoor. Give me one “CS course” math and physics grads take. No, your physics professor’s Monte Carlo methods lectures don’t count.

The average CS dork isn’t much, but it’s obvious this argument is an appeal to prestige than anything else. I’ve seen math students, having been an undergrad in it myself - the average is *better* than average CS, but the actually smart people are the small group of honors people who do all the hard grad focused sequences and get to grad classes in their last year. Everyone likes to claim that this is them, but there are only 10-15 of these people per semester out of a class of 200. You start to see the same faces over and over again.

>>12094858
>>12094865
I would like to add that in many American schools, it’s required to take an introduction to analysis before tackling Rudin, and usually this is considered enough to graduate. Even when they do take Rudin, I’ve seen so many math majors complain it’s the pinnacle of difficulty and rigor in their undergrad...which is sort of laughable. Math majors have a massive inflated sense of self importance, which you have to shed if you want to get an ounce of actual work done in grad school.

By in large, while your average math student is at least a bit better than your average CS student, they’re not competent enough to be good or even great. On the other hand, I feel the actually good CS students who like math always get tied down to codemonkey expectations and comparisons. The theory of expanders, now used in thin groups and analytic number theory, was largely discovered and developed in CS departments, but it’s convenient to forget this because codemonkeys, amirite fellow math chads?

>>12094865
>recall some anecdotes I might have from undergrad
This data is available to all staff. But i am relying on anecdotes from my german and scandi friends to draw conclusions about the whole world, true.
>At my undergrad, I knew more than a decent amount of math and physics majors who got tripped up at data structures and other introductory classes.
I do too, but now that that i can see the data, it's quite apparent what the reality is (on the uni i'm at).
>in the US people generally apply straight to their PhD europoor
I know. And they still decide which courses they'll take. And there is possible overlap between fields. I'd wager that the performance difference is the same in US, i don't see why intelligent people would be overwhelmingly attracted to CS in US vs EU.
>Give me one “CS course” math and physics grads take
In my uni, physishits often take computational geometry, FEM and parallel matrix computations, mathematicians like automata&convolutional codes and another popular one is computability and complexity. Not every math/physics MSc takes it, obviously, but quite a few do, every year.
>it’s obvious this argument is an appeal to prestige than anything else
I don't see it. If anything, it's the CS people who care about grades, because they're unemployable if they don't perform well.
>the average is *better* than average CS
That's what i'm saying. There are outliers, obviously.
>the actually smart people are the small group of honors people who do all the hard grad focused sequences and get to grad classes in their last year
We don't really have the concept of honors here. If you're good, or even just interested in something that is not part of undergrad, you go to the professor and he gives you a list of reading/helps you clarify, with the possibility of working on some paper. You can also freely visit the grad classes and participate in the exams (you don't get credit, but if you're undergrad you don't care).

>>12093644
Coping this much, lmao.

>>12094873
> I feel
Cool. Others don't. CS people get "maths cred" for their work too. See the bunch around Voevodsky or Coquand.

>>12092379
Are you a journalist or something?
You have a preconceived notion, and no matter the data, you'll find a way to make it fit to your idea via exaggeration and picking and choosing.

>I take pride in the courses which my major foces me to take; therefore, I am smart
I will never stop laughing at people here for this.

>>12092068
Oh thanks! I think I will stick with discrete math then, I am not that much interested in curcuits and the like anyway
>>12093539
Whats the issue nigger? To me it seems like vector analysis with imaginary numbers. I also think it will have a very theoritical approach that won't actually teach you anything new other than how you can do the same things you've been doing but with complex numbers instead.

What's with these high school tier posts?
Computater science is just numerical methods and differential equations through linear algebra, even stats if you want to stretch it

>>12086920
Complex analysis unless you really want to do something with programming

>>12095337
I really can’t tell if this is bait or not
Computer science is not numerical methods for solving equations

>>12095873
Wait what, graph coloring isn't solving a differential equation through linear algebra? What do you mean that SMT isn't about solving a differential equation tbrough linear algebra? Wait wait wait, hold on, you want to tell me that CSP isn't solving a differential equation through linear algebra?
Oh no, i thought CS was just numerical methods and differential equations through linear algebra!

>>12086710
Here are two things I will say in response.
Engineers have a higher work load than basically anyone else. We do more subjects. Naturally, there is only so much you can fit into an undergraduate course. The stuff that is actually useful is put in. Generally speaking. Once you've graduated, you're free to go further into your subject and learn the more specialised topics.

>>12092337
>The entire point is that most EE, ME, and CS people are fucking OBNOXIOUS and think they're good at math and physics
Absolutely not. We try to use as little math and physics as we can to get something done.

>>12093026
The EEs, ChemEs, and MEs have a larger work load than you. We do more subjects, we do more labs, and we actually design and build stuff. As a freshman alone I helped design a rocket, race car, and did some of my own stuff on the side like 3d printing miniature drones, this is while taking 8 different classes.
We don't need to do autistic level physics or useless mathematics because it's not relevant.

>>12095019
No, I just compared the two tables and looked for common differences between the test scores by major. Then I compared the sub-groups of majors’ scores against one another paying particular attention to the size in gaps between scores on the verbal and quant tests for the humanities&social sciences and the sciences. You can read the exact same tables above if you’re curious. A journalist wouldn’t have looked at the tables for longer than the time required to notice a single piece of data that “contradicted” the argument put forth, exactly what the people I’m reply to have done. If you look carefully the elite performance for math and physics is enormously overstated compared to the other science majors, and the verbal scores for math and physics are both the closest to those of the humanities&social sciences, and also the gap in quant scores for those non-science majors is much greater than the modest gap in verbal scores favoring them. From here and the fact that it’s irrelevant whether there are future PhD or masters candidates, since a huge number of math and physics majors end up either in masters or applied fields, I claimed that the GRE scores reported show superior cognitive function, especially as relating to quantitative reasoning and verbal reasoning, for the math and physics groups. This is relatively uncontroversial information as well since it is backed up by a half century of cognitive studies of college educated adults where the physical and mathematical sciences always prevail over all other groups. If I was a journalist I wouldn’t have looked for information that others had access to which could be used to refute me and I wouldn’t have shared it with the thread. Faggot.

>>12086710
>CS majors don't take classes in combinatorics, graph theory, and abstract algebra
That was literally all my first semesters math course, We label it discrete math. Also included was set theory and logic.

>>12096015
All the engineers at my law school say that the workload is way higher in law school than engineering. So even when you try to use your workload excuse to wave away your poor math and physics knowledge, law students are working way harder than you.

>>12096015
>Engineers have a higher work load than basically anyone else.

Lol, no. The workload in a typical honors real analysis class alone is way more than a full semester load of engineering classes put together.

>>Math majors don't take classes in combinatorics, graph theory, and abstract algebra
>>EEs don't take a class in non-baby electrodynamics (at the level of griffiths/schwartz/etc), or complex analysis
>>mechEs don't take a class in lagrangian mechanics
>
>Yet in order to try and prove that they are good at math and physics, all these brainlet majors claim that they know these things, took the classes, and that only those who went to "shit schools" didn't. Well, I looked up all the requirements for EEs, MEs, Math, etc at Harvard, MIT, Carnegie Mellon, Caltech, and Stanford. You know how many of them required Math brainlets to take abstract algebra or EEs to take electromagnetic field theory?
>
>NOT ONE. They all just required the basic calc/linear algebra classes, and EEs had to take a baby class in differential equations, and Math had to take a baby class in "discrete math" (brainlet math). So stop fucking LYING about your shit brainlet majors about the classes to try and impress cs and physics CHADS, ok? In reality you're shit at math and shit at physics. Nobody short of EE/cs double majors is taking a class in proof-based complex analysis, etc. Don't be a fraud and lie about things, imbeciles.

>>12096611
lol dude, we can agree that engineers are baby tier but math majors are better than physics majors. Proof classes are harder than anything youll ever do in physics

>>12096628
I was just baiting OP, I'm a Math undergrad myself. I will not agree on you that physics is lesser than Math. Proofs are a safespace for linear thinking, I like it because I will be sure there are no holes in anything, I will do Data Science in the future I think. But Physics Majors dude, they are just higher IQ, I got hard filetered by Electromagnetism, I don't want to think in tridimentional ways to know how the fuck an induced field works, passed with minimum grade to be done with it.
My respects to Physics Majors to be honest, I can't be assed to play with math in creative ways

>>12096658
It’s probably just different abilities. I’ve heard many physicists say that math harder than physics due to how abstract it is.

>>12096570
>>12096599
Wrong. I've seen the time tables. No need to cope. But keep coping that you learn donut math faggots, while you sit in your class room and don't do anything. We start applying what we are learning right away.
See.
>>12096045

>>12086710
>>CS majors don't take classes in combinatorics, graph theory, and abstract algebra
literally all these topics were covered in one single discrete mathematics class i took

>>12096611
this post reminds me that OP got really quiet when I pointed out caltech EE does use griffiths

The engineer envy is real ITT. Future McDonald's employees seething and trying to keep themselves off suicide watch by telling themselves it's going to be okay because they proofs.

>why yes, I didn't do electromagnetism or topology, but I still have a better job than you. How did you know?

>>12086710
Dilate

>>12086710
>proof-based complex analysis
Name one reason why more than a small fraction of the scientific and engineering community need to know "proof-based math".

>>12097089
Because it makes me smarter than you!

>>12096967
>>12096935
Stats show that math and physics grads are actually more employable than engineers and cs majors.

>>12096967
If we are not basing things off of math or physics knowledge and just who has a better job. Lawyers beat engineers hard when it comes to that. Also nobody will want to hear about your day as an engineer. But damn, you tell a girl you’re an attorney and how you deliver justice, you can’t compete. Your job is fucking boring, don’t act like you’re going to be doing anything interesting at your future job.

Engineers like to cope that they have better job prospects than math and physics grads when these threads come up but the thing is, engineer grads who stop at the bachelor level are just the people who aren’t smart enough to make it in law or medical school where the real money is. So it’s all cope. They are a pathetic group of people.

>>12097680
>Stats show that math and physics grads
More employable in call centres and burger joints, yes.

>>12097702
Seething jelly math/physics major ; )
You can get to the highest level in engineering simply with a bachelor. Real world experience is more important, something you will never experience.

>>12097709
It’s possible but not likely. Who’s going to trust you do innovative research at a big company if you only have a bachelors degree.

>>12097706
No. Stats say most go on to finance or software.

>>12097738
>Who’s going to trust you do innovative research at a big company if you only have a bachelors degree.
Through real world experience, doofus. Actually working on projects. Thought it's probably best to spend 3-5 years in industry and then go back for an Msc.

>>12097741
Cute coping ; )

>>12097744
>and then go back for an Msc
You just admitted my point bro

>>12097744
I wonder if you actually know what its like to be an engineer. These projects you are going to be doing will basically just be busy work. You arent going to work your way up to head researcher with just a bachelors degree whos been doing the work they send to the grunts. Basically, what Im saying is that engineering is the knew blue collar job. Youre just a cog in a machine

>>12097778
what do i have to study if i want to do some ML research or to build technology with lasers/photonics etc ? I was a 2nd year comp sci student then I switched to engineering ended my year and now I'm not sure what to do

>>12097778
You don't need to be a head researcher to work on projects at a high level. You don't even need to be a researcher.

>>12097809
Then what do you call the highest level of engineering if not being someone who researches something new for engineering? It certainly cant be a manager or a CEO, because at that point you arent actually doing engineering anymore.

>>12097680
Yes, because there is so few. Math and physics hard filter subhumans who got in because of "being good at computers"
>>12097706
>>12097746
sneed

Now that the matter has been settled on engineers and cs majors, I think its time to set real deal math majors apart from "I lub science" physics majors.

>>12097803
>ML research
it depends on what you want to do in the field. There's a lot of bad research out there on the side of experiment. On the other hand, the theory research is of much higher quality but given less attention since it's not as fashionable. The applications to things like graphics are also really cool.
You should study PAC models / computational learnability, analysis, probability theory, statistical learning theory, evolutionary algorithms, and convex optimization at the very least. I'm assuming you already know up to vector calculus, differentials, basic calculus, and have familiarity with proofs
>laser / photonics
clearly you should look into optics. Obviously, you'll want (partial and ordinary) differential equations, (some) Fourier theory, electrodynamics, probability, familiarity with information and noisy channels, basics of communication, etc. These are roughly what you would see in applied optical physics

>>12097680
>employable
employable in what sense? As far as I'm aware, math and physics grads (ie those who have yet to do grad school) have a marked disadvantage at most jobs at the HR keyword level and at the interview stage. One of my friends does hiring and interview duty periodically - you certainly do see people from math, physics, and engineering, but their performance at solving problems during interviews varies wildly. He finds that math and CS majors generally do the best, followed by physics and engineering.

This has little to do with '''intelligence''' - the fact is that the majority of people who major in this or that have little claim to the competency they try and project, and people are generally not as comfortable at adopting unfamiliar material nearly as well as they like to indicate. As much as it'd be nice to box it off as trivial, the interview process to getting into a good company for software engineering isn't easy.

>>12097854
Undergrad math and physics really isn't the type of filter you think it is. Most people get filtered by their own laziness.
It's always funny to see people patting themselves on the back for their choice of *undergrad.* Your grapple with *baby Rudin* or Griffiths (not even Jackson) does not make for a significant edge against your peers in other majors, especially when you find in grad school the best of those peers end up learning it when they want / need.

>>12097944
thanks foryour response but i was talking academically should i stay in engineering and get an Msc in EE or should i go back to CS basically are interesting ML jobs easier to get than interesting laser/photonics jobs where I'll actually get to research in engineering/physics / not code monkeying

>>12098032
>interesting ML jobs easier
This is false. There are a lot of menial "ML engineer" positions where you code monkey but with tensorflow and associated libraries with your tools. In engineering, most entry level positions are not *that* far off from application specific codemonkeying - this is why CADmonkeying and PSCADmonkeying are also memes. Getting actually good ML positions requires at least a masters, and those positions all ask for papers at top conferences with lots of citations. If you want to do research at all, you will have to do grad school at some point, and the positions for ML are *hypercompetitive.* Look at some of the stories posted on blind about ML research positions in industry.

PS - most people like to prop up engineering and its careers, but most of it at entry level is just application specific codemonkeying with a bit of extra science thrown on top. However, the imaginary prestige is enough to get most people off.

>>12086710
Breh that's literally because they are UG degrees

>>12097962
>>12097979
Good take, and very accurate.

>>12098055
yeah but that was a question not an affirmation i should have added an "?"
also i live in europe so i will probably get an Msc definitely not a phd though

>>12097904
Very good idea, I agree.

>>12096941
Literally no one is envious of engineer brainlets

>>12091088
Lol sounds similar to my uni

>>12098200
EPB ?

>>12098249
nope, it's in Stockholm but I guess most european unis are similar. is EPB french?

>>12098249
>>12098542
tried googling EPB but didn't find anything lol

>Engineers and CS majors are just as good at math and physics as math/physics majors, bro! we have to take abstract algebra, number theory, topology, PDEs, measure theory, Jackson EM, Sakurai QM, and real analysis in the first year of college! We have to take more math than math majors! You must have went to a shitty school if you
disagree man! The people that couldn't handle engineering dropped out and did math and physics!

"No you're not and literally no college requires that for you brainlets, not even a PhD MIT and Harvard. Just stop lying."

>lol seethe xD enjoy working retail while I'm gonna be rich and have your dream job :D btw I learned all that stuff in grad school haha you're an undergrad dude :^)

In reality only the top 1% of CS/engicucks get those 100k FAANG jobs in the bay area, which is below poverty line there, the rest will make 50-60k and stay there with more upward mobility). But CS/engicucks LARP like they're going to be loaded when they'd be lucky to make a quarter of what a surgeon makes, LOL. If you really wanted to be rich through academia you would go to med school or go to a T14 law school. B you were too dumb to pass organic chemistry or get above a 170 on the LSAT. And even that is baby retard shit compared to the math and physics that we have to do.

You cucks were the ones that started these arguments. Now that you got btfo you keep throwing all sorts of copes. It's time to admit you lost and bow before your pure math and physics overlords.

>Engineers and CS majors are just as good at math and physics as math/physics majors, bro! We have to take abstract algebra, number theory, topology, PDEs, measure theory, Jackson EM, Sakurai QM, and real analysis in the first year of college! We have to take more math than math majors! You must have went to a shitty school if you disagree man! The people that couldn't handle the workload in engineering dropped out and did math and physics!

"No you're not and literally no college requires that for you brainlets, not even a PhD MIT and Harvard. You took calc 2 and some linear algebra. Just stop lying, faggot."

>lol ok seethe xD enjoy working retail while I'm gonna be rich and have your dream job :D btw I learned all that stuff in grad school I swear haha you're an undergrad dude :^)

Every single time.

In reality only the top 1% of CS/engicucks get those prized 100k FAANG jobs in the bay area, which is below poverty line there. The rest will make 50-60k and stay there their entire career with zero upward mobility. Yet, CS/engicucks LARP like they're going to be loaded when they'd be lucky to make a quarter of what a surgeon makes, LOL. If you really wanted to be rich through academia you would go to med school or go to a T14 law school. But, you were too dumb to pass organic chemistry or get above a 170 on the LSAT. And even that is baby retard shit compared to the math and physics that we have to do. We do pure math and physics because we LIKE IT. Any of us Chads could take the mcat or lsat and ace it if we wanted to make big money. This is why math and physics majors have the highest scores on any grad school admissions test.

You cucks were the ones that started these arguments. Now that you got btfo you keep throwing all sorts of copes. It's time to admit you lost and bow before your pure math and physics overlords. BTW, I don't know if you know this but making 60k a year isn't rich, LOL.

>>12098652
>This is why math and physics majors have the highest scores on any grad school admissions test

Yeah, thats not true big guy. Philosophy majors do the best on most admissions tests. This is pretty well documented too.

>>12098542
>>12098546
nah its not french and if you were from my uni you would have understood but it's not in stockholm neither and most eureopean unis might be similar but in france they have a different system for engineering it's basically a competition to get to grad school

>>12098725
>philosophy majors do best
No they don't, see the scores posted in this thread. They're 3rd-4th ranked for overall GRE.

>>12098652
i studied one year of pure math 2 years of cs and one year of engineering and unironically engineering is way fucking harder than pure math although physics might be harder than engineering idk

granted in math you have got to understand things in a deeper way but in engineering you just have way more work and way more things to understand
but cs is easier than math im not going to lie about it

>>12098892
Check again, sweety.
https://www.nmu.edu/sites/DrupalPhilosophy/files/UserFiles/Files/Pre-Drupal/SiteSections/Resources/GRE_Scores_by_Intended_Major.pdf

>>12098949
https://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide_table4.pdf

you're wrong, brainlet. Please don't reply to me until you learn how to compute an average.

>>12098949
Its really not that unbelievable. Philosophy is the foundation of everything, its no wonder it would require the best and brightest to succeed in it. There should be no shame for math and physics majors to understand that philosophy majors are better people than them. Its just how engineers have to realize that mathematicians are better than them. Only philosophers can stand at the top.

>>12098964
Did you even bother to go to the link? Heres what it says. "Average deviation across the verbal, quantitative, and analytic writing sections"

>>12098972
I've never met a philosophy major that was good at math, and I've never met a philosophy major that wasn't a boring sociopath

>>12098964
Oh, sweety.

>>12098986
You see, this is the intellectual rigor of STEM. They have no idea what anecdotal evidence even is or why its not worth considering. Meanwhile philosophy majors are the masters of argumentation and understand the true nature of things. Physicists and mathematicians only calculate, but physicists are the ones who can understand.

>>12098981
No. I didn't read your link. I just read mine because it's from ETS and I know how to compute the average combined score of all the different majors listed. Physicists and mathematicians have the highest combined mean scores. They have the largest proportion of their representatives in the top 90th percentile scoring sub-groups as well. They are obviously, and as attested by actual cog psyche studies empirically, the most intelligent people in academia and industry. Phil majors load onto verbal and logical-symbolic hard and that's how they outperform CS. I was phil before I switched to math I'm well aware of how difficult it is and how smart those people are but they aren't able to compete with mathfags.

>>12098987
literal brainlet.

>>12098999
So your link is right and mine is wrong because you had to compute the averages yourself in your link while the study in my link already averaged the scores? Is this the really the thought process of stem?

>>12098996
>Physicists and mathematicians only calculate

are you fucking kidding me lol

Do people really think that math and physics are more intellectually rigorous than philosophy on this board? I guess 4chan is contrarian so I shouldnt be surprised.

I think its obvious that philosophers are more intelligent than mathematicians and physicists in that philosophers are needed to understand math and physics. Just look at philosophy of math or philosophy of physics. You need philosophers to be able to understand your own subject.

>>12099042
Ya, thats a good point. Perhaps I was wrong

>>12099042
I actually never thought of it that way. Maybe you are right.

>>12086710
why the fuck would EE or CS majors need to prove anything to you retard? why are you incels so fixated on this shit. for the sake of yous?

>>12099077
Make them feel clever.

>>12099077
The entire reason this discussion ever happened is because CS and EE faggots pretended like they had to learn proofs and a lot of math, then when called out they would always say "YOU MUST HAVE WENT TO A SHITTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE BUT WE HAD TO TAKE THAT".

Then they got btfo once it was shown that no college required any of the math and physics courses these supposed "good programs" have and started moving the goalposts by saying they would be rich from their 60k a year wagecuck jobs.

>>12086710
nice meme. CS will make your field obsolete in 10 years though.

>>12086710
CS major here.
I had combinatorics, graph theory and algebra while doing my Bachelor, and took a deeper look at some of it during the Master program.
Half my year dropped out for failing analysis, though.
Maybe it's because I'm from Old Europe, and not from Burgerland.
Things have reportedly been getting worse over here as well, but I guess it's still a far cry from the US.

You know how many times I heard on here and on /g/ over the years that:

>Ok most cs programs are bad pajeet shit and don't have much math, but if you go to a "good school" then you have to learn as much math as math majors! You have to learn topology, algebra, analysis, etc! In fact going for CS means you already have a math degree!
>bro EEs actually have to know a lot of complex analysis and PDE theory! maybe not at your community college?

Literally hundreds if not thousands. Especially that /g/ pasta that spams the principle of induction in set theoretic language and says you need to know abstract algebra and differential geometry to "take the reigns of a computer". Even though I knew it was a lie, I actually looked into it and literally none of it is true. None. Your "good school" only required fucking calc 2 for CS. Yes, even MIT. Then when their claims get ripped to shreds about the undergraduate CS degree and engineering degrees having almost no math or physics in them, they switch to pointing to fringe examples of abstract algebra and number theory in theoretical computer science research papers and the usage of QM in designing the next generation of transistors.

You are literally taking 1% of 1% of people at the top of their field (most who got a math or physics degree in the FIRST place) and using it to construct this complete fantasy about you being a math genius at MIT that can hang with the big boyz, when you only took the typical classes on linear algebra, calc 1-based physics, and differential equations.

The problem is you dumbfucks actually thinking learning how to multiply complex numbers is equivalent to a course in complex analysis and that learning what a group is in your "discrete math" means you know abstract algebra.

You don't. There's no fucking school on the planet where a CS degree is equivalent to one in math. Even a "math education" degree with the bare minimum requirements has vastly more math than CS, at ANY university.

>>12099093
I've never seen a single EE ever who gave a shit about proofs.

>>12099179
Well I've seen hundreds of posts on here and all over the internet claiming EEs from "good schools" had to know PDE theory and complex analysis (lie). So they obviously give a shit about the idea of doing them, but are too stupid to actually do them.

>>12099185
You're probably getting trolled by 14 year olds.

>>12099077
>why the fuck would EE or CS majors need to prove anything to you retard?
>CS
Literally the most valuable things to come out of CS have been algorithms, their proofs of correctness, proof of their complexity, and the systems that implement them. CS largely operates like
>figure out method
>prove it has strong properties
or
>figure out family of methods
>prove that cleverly blending them yields nice properties
CS IS NOT CODEMONKEYING. The important shit from CS follow formal proof. Regardless OP is a dumbfuck

>>12099187
Welcome to 4chan.

>>12099185
Not doing something is not evidence that one lacks the aptitude to do it.
Proofs are entirely irrelevant to working as an EE.
That's why EEs don't do them.

>>12099158
lmao, I find what actually happens is that good CS programs invite more math and are open about theory being their focus. And the good students generally double major anyway and do honors / grad classes. That is, the majority of CS students are just ok, but there's a small subset of honors math / CS double majors who smoke everyone in both subjects.

>>12099196
Guess what, I DON'T FUCKING CARE!

Just stop saying EEs have to learn complex analysis and be good at math and physics at this magical elite college in the sky. It's literally so fucking simple!

>>12099206
We could learn it if we wanted to, we just don't.

>>12099206
your reddit is showing.
half of the things said here are said in jest, as a lie, or out of spite.
stop letting what you read here color your impression on these people. they're just lonely, inflammatory freshmen

>>12099200
>lmao, I find what actually happens is that good CS programs invite more math and are open about theory being their focus
You literally got proven wrong, multiple times, about the retarded "good CS schools" myth in this thread. And you are still lying about it, you stupid nigger. Learn to read. God damn.

>That is, the majority of CS students are just ok, but there's a small subset of honors math / CS double majors who smoke everyone in both subjects.
That's funny because literally virtually every CS/math double major I knew did the bare minimum and got the BA degree instead of the BS. They took the "abstract algebra for teachers" sequence using Pinter instead of the honors classes we had to take using Artin/Herstein. The department actually had exceptions for CS double majors where they didn't even have to take as many classes to take the full degree; it was a complete joke. I knew one CS/math double major that was good at math and actually took demanding classes.

You know what he said? That the CS degree was utterly trivial and that he just tacked it on for the employment prospects.

>this retard nigger still going on about "muuuuuuh good cs schools totally have a ton of math and theory bro"

Holy shit it doesn't even matter how much you show them truth and facts, they literally never stop lying until they die. It's incredible.

Wait, Caltech doesn't have real analysis, number theory, and abstract algebra required for their CS program? Just calc and "discrete math"?

What a shithole community college. Just goes to show how stupid math and physics losers are for thinking this was a good school. At a real cs program, like where I went, you need to take those classes plus a graduate course in functional analysis at the minimum. In fact they award you a math PhD for finishing the undergraduate CS degree.

I pity the idiots that studied math and physics, and went to community colleges like Caltech, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, and Cambridge. At real schools CS has more math than an actual math degree.

>>12099310
Look at this. Stanford, another bottom of the barrel community college. I never even heard of this place before. Yet again, only calculus, discrete, an extremely basic stats class, and 2 other electives are required.

What an absolute shithole. Another fake codemonkey bootcamp CS program. In real CS universities we have to learn highly theoretical computer science based off of high level abstract algebra and number theory. If you disagree, you just went to a shit school.

>>12099200
>lmao, I find what actually happens is that good CS programs invite more math
They literally don't and you memers have been debunked in this thread alone at least a dozen times. Shut the fuck up you worthless drone and go back to struggling with calc 2.

University of Chicago? More like university of SHITcago! These worthless community college grads from Chimpcongo wouldn't know a good CS school if it hit them in the face! Fuck, go to a real CS program man!

I have never seen CS cucks get blown the fuck out so bad about their good school LARP. By their own logic every CS program is code monkey shit. Incredible.

>>12099235
>>12099248
> And you are still lying about it, you stupid nigger. Learn to read. God damn.
I'm not the person who you were talking to, but ok. Either way, your posts reeks of salt.
>did the bare minimum
My experience is the exact opposite lmao. The double majors in my class showed up in the honors sequences and grad classes.
>abstract algebra for teachers
>????????
what the fuck is this class? We used Artin and a bit of Aluffi for sylow theorems in our classes.
>That the CS degree was utterly trivial and that he just tacked it on for the employment prospects.
I did the double major, and I've been here in multiple posts saying
>the average CS major is pretty bad
>the degree requirements are pretty lackluster
but good faculty presence means your upper divs, honors, indep study, grad classes are fine. The major itself is fine if you know what you want out of it - it's been established multiple times in this thread that you can go hard if you want.

You're interested in characterizing students strictly by their areas of study, which is both incredibly sophomoric and ultimately pretty useless. The crossover goes both ways: if you look at Srivastava at Berkeley, the dude went his way through math and CS, got a CS PhD, but is now a mathematician in the math department who works on both CS and mathematical physics problems. He was one of the guys. who solved the big Kadison-Singer problem in functional analysis.

I don't think anybody but trolls really care about the specific classes or "X major takes Y math class." It's just this idea that by being a CS major, you are damned to be an insubordinate brainlet is a weird proposition that reeks of insecurity and bitterness. You're literally obsessing over fucking *undergrad* of all things, the most insignificant portion of your academic studies, to the point where people do radically different things in grad or in industry. If anybody needs to kill themselves over massive amounts of cope, it's you.

>>12099380
No CS major has seriously claimed they need analysis, but there are common elective options to take graph theory, combinatorics, math logic, etc. in the math departments.

I don't know why you faggots are so obsessed with *minimal* requirements. Sure, it's what the average will do, but on the same token, the average math major in the US spends 2.5 years doing calculus and menial proofs before doing baby analysis and introductory abstract algebra before getting to anything interesting - it's even a thing among admissions committees to throw out applications who barely got to these classes at all.

>>12099400
Literally nobody said that.

If you actually could read you would realize that people are only mocking the dumb CS prestige obsessed undergrads that talk about how "real programs" make them learn all this mathematics that they never have to. What CS people should be saying is that;

>the requirements for a CS degree are minimal even at high ranked colleges
>you must go far above and beyond the CS requirements if you want to do interesting non code monkey work
>you need to take further mathematics and even get a double major in mathematics to get into graduate school for CS
>the average CS grad is not going to be rich
>the average CS grad is a code monkey retard
>even standard math degrees are a joke and you should be taking real analysis and algebra in the first year then moving onto graduate classes and research immediately if you actually want to be a mathematician

But nobody ever does. When someone says "well CS is basically a math degree", why don't you tell them to shut the fuck up?

>>12099369
weird to bring up uchicago, a school whose math and CS departments are super close to each other. When CS undergrads and grads can take electives in geometric complexity, which is literally category theory + algebraic geometry in a trench coat

http://ramakrishnadas.cs.uchicago.edu/gct4.pdf

So no, the average requirements aren't there, but when U Chicago computer scientists are working on this and their students taking classes in it...it's a weird argument to make

>>12086710
What the fuck is with the "me better than you" attitude on this board. Competition is healthy, but when it reaches this point, it's pathetic.

Physics, CS, Maths, Engineering, do whatever the fuck you want(even though I'd look at job prospects). No matter which one you choose, you can guarentee that your mathematical abilities outperform regular laymen.
>>12086739
Based

>>12099427
I agree, and its all a waste for you on here to try and think that any one of your disciplines is the best. If any of you want some actual intellectualism, come over to /his/ where philosophy is at

>>12099110
The ultimate blackpill for them. Its simply too hard to handle.

>>12099423
>Literally nobody said that.
what is it with you and ignoring literally every instance of it being said. People like you ignore
>>12093264
>>12093301
and the numerous other posts mocking CS and the people who major in it, whether they're code monkeys or not.
>people are only mocking the dumb CS prestige obsessed undergrads that talk about how "real programs" make them learn all this mathematics that they never have to. What CS people should be saying is that;
They're doing both that and unironic mocking of more than good students. Regardless, how many times does someone have to point out to you that the argument has been
>CS as a degree sucks for requirements
>as a topic it's fine and has good faculty at good schools if you wanna go further
Hell, I even agree to some extent because I double majored. The problem is that you take it beyond 11 to try and discredit *any* CS undergrad experience or those who have been successful in math later on. Almost everyone else here has agreed with you that the average CS grad is a code monkey but they make decent to great amounts of money - 'rich' is relative, but it can't be ignored that the average in software is high.
>Nobody ever does
dude, this entire board is 'shit on CS 24/7 - the board.' the people who defend CS as not harboring lots of mouth breathers do so reflexively against people like you who have nothing but vitriol to offer because you think Artin, Rudin, and maybe Fold are the pinnacle of undergrad difficulty, much less advanced mathematics. CS majors are annoying because they're mouth breathers, and math majors are annoying because they have an inflated sense of difficulty on their own course load, ESPECIALLY those who aren't in honors or doing grad classes by the end of junior year *at the latest*

>>12099457
>because you think Artin, Rudin, and maybe Fold are the pinnacle of undergrad difficulty, much less advanced mathematics

Lol, I took the grad algebra class using Lang and the grad analysis class using the Green Rudin book during my bachelor's. Nice assumptions faggot.

>>12099439
>intellectualism
You mean "incestuous farting"?
Philosophy as a whole has died the death during the 20th century.

>>12099472
Then it should be obvious to you just how many fewer math students there are in the good classes. Papa Rudin is a lot better than Folland imo anyway.
Many math majors default to their advanced classes to use baby books like Do Carmo, think introduction to geodesics + calc 3 is super high level, and never see an atlas in their life.

>>12099475
Just because your dull mind finds it dull does not mean a thing to the greatest field of endeavor humans have ever embarked on. To think of a world without philosophy is like thinking of a world without air or water for those us who appreciate true thoughtful material.

>>12099511
It's not about dullness, if philosophy as a whole has been turned into a giant citation bubble that produces nothing but hot air.
The last big philosophers were in the age of Kant. You could also reasonably argue Marx and Hegel, but considering how massively their works have been disfigured - especially in the last 30 years -, I'm wary about calling them "big".
After them philosophy has been nothing but a gigantic incestuous fart party. Especially in the academics.

>>12099550
I'm sorry you feel that way, but there have been plenty of great philosophers since Kant. I was just reading O.W. Holmes, and he was a giant of legal philosophy. There can be no question of his influence. But like I said, come to /his/ if you feel like indulging in true intellectualism.

ITT masturbation

>>12086710
This would matter if computer scientists or engineers in academia claimed to know analysis or math yet used none, but there are a myriad of papers in these subjects that demonstrate either
1) there are relevant subfields with researchers who know these subjects
2) anything that isn't immediately motivated is still within their abilities

an example: http://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~minilek/publications/papers/terminal_jl.pdf

but I guess it's easy to say 'hurr cs majors couldn't do analysis, computer science is a joke'

I tripled majored in Physics, Math, and Biology. My Masters was in CS.
OP is not wrong however Physicists don't take senior level math classes either.

My CS graduate plan didn't even let me include Complex Analysis (grad level math course) as an approved CS elective so I took the course just to take it.

>>12100345
>didn’t let me take complex analysis
>masters
There are a decent amount of applications of complex analysis in CS - it’s probably because it was a masters course plan (usually focused on immediately motivated applications, will probably accept combinatorics or real analysis for algorithms and ML) and not a PhD

>>12100353
You're correct. Complex analysis wasn't related to my thesis and also the fact that my undergraduate background lacked CS so I needed more CS relevant knowledge. (at least that was my advisors reasoning and he signs off on the curriculum)
The core classes were on advanced applications of data structures and algorithms. I took real analysis and combinatorics at the undergraduate level and "relearned" a lot of the subject matter in graduate level CS courses. Ofcourse there was a lot of new material.

With all of these degrees I ended up just going back into the military as an officer but I hope to get into a PhD program in my late 40s after I'm retired.

>>12099550
how about my boy descartes?

>>12099110
>muh AI singularity!!!
Not real and cope

>>12099110
based