/sci/ - Science & Math

>Pure math
This argument would make more sense in the context of high-tech labs and things like that but math? There is literally no reason to go to an elite university for pure math. If you're really interested you can just read books.

If you get good enough no working mathematician is going to ignore you just because you lack credentials. Asking and answering interesting questions is credentials enough to warrant attention.

>>7218064
Not OP here. This is an interesting argument you make. I suppose math is truly an intellectual field if it cares more for your ability than credentialism.
Woo

>>7218059
>What is the point of your life if you didn't go to an elite uni?

1) I am an engineering major and applied math major. This would be a lot harder to do if I was at an elite uni
2) I get more free time to fuck around and hang out with friends
3) Easier to get internships and shit

Big fish in a small pond nigga

>>7218115
Spend too much time around normies and you fall to their level. Your laziness now is limiting your future intellectual potential more than you likely realize, assuming you are smart enough that you could have attended an elite university instead. Of course, if money was a limiting factor, you probably made the right choice.

>>7218126
king among fools is a king nonetheless.

>>7218126
>normies
lol. You've never had sex.

I don't have the money for an elite uni. I would probably buckle under the stress as well.

>>7218126
>normies
The elitism is strong in this one.

>>7218141
You're posting on 4chan, brother

>>7218059
tfw I'm a sophmore and I understand that atleast 10G isn't well defined with the information provided with the picture. Are we talking about a direct sum of P and N or the coproduct of P and N?

>>7218161

it's the whole thing m80. grown ups use symbols for maths sonny, we don't need to replace the symbols with numbers every 5 seconds to tell the low IQ people what's going on

Only a retard forgets about libraries, books, internet, videos, images, computers, notebooks, papers and keeps saying hurr spend all your money on L33T UNI.

The most valuable asset of an elite uni is that you can meet really smart people there and learn from them. Science is best taught personally, reading books is just not the same experience.

>>7218178
exactly
listening to someone who sees the bigger picture of what you're studying is invaluable
reading a book is obviously great, but if you want to be the best it is simply not enough.

>>7218178
True.
Before I started university I went through some online courses from elite universities and watched some lectures on youtube and I loved it.
Then when I finally visited the actual lectures at my university I noticed that it's nothing like that.

Lecturers are just reading down the slides in a monotonous voice.
Computer science classes are retard level and people already barely keep up with it.
Meanwhile, math is harder, but only because it's a jumble of various topics mixed together without any structure. There's no official script. It's like playing a game on survival mode.
The first homework deadline was before the first lecture, and approx. half of the class already dropped out at that point.

calc 1 is the same at ohio state as it is at MIT.

The difference is in the rigour, but thats what you make of it; you can learn it without any uni, if youre sufficiently driven

>>7218221
>watched elite uni lectures
>my university
>many people dropped out

LOL. The drop out rates at ivy league and Oxbridge are lower than crap unis! Elite unis set harder work and less people drop out. People at YOUR uni dropout.

Bravo m8. You'll be surrounded by "yoonay" ladz (UK) / drunk fratbros (USA) for your next four years. Keep telling yourself the people at MIT have no advantage over you

>>7218191

>reading a book is obviously great, but if you want to be the best it is simply not enough.

True. Unless youre someone who can learn without having their hand held, of course.

>>7218059
The elite universities of the world graduate tens of thousands of students every year and NOT ONE OF THEM has been able to create a conscious computer program.

So much for elite universities!

>elite uni
>tfw you are broke-ass guy from shitty eastern european country.

>>7218233
MIT shoves calc 1 and 2 into one semester.

>...is at a worthwhile and more selective uni and learning more in a month that you do in a year.

wat.
Elite unis are a big advantage, but not because they have better courses.
If you go to a random university in Germany, say, then the name is no "Harvard" and so it reads like nothing in the CV, but what is taught is not really any worse. People have access to knowledge.

>>7218247
It's obvious you never talked to a great scientist.

>>7218260
but the content covered is the same. going to school at a place like MIT is literally signing up for a 4 year hazing period so you can brag about going to a challenging school.

>>7218237
>The drop out rates at ivy league and Oxbridge are lower than crap unis!
I know. I mean, it makes sense. We have no permit restrictions at all here, so we have like 90% dropouts. I think the system makes more sense than looking at grades and raising the bar for entrance qualification though. You basically have to pass the first term.
>You'll be surrounded by "yoonay" ladz (UK) / drunk fratbros (USA) for your next four years.
I'm from another european country. It's either 3 or 5 years here. We have many international students, so I don't really see many people of one stereotype.

>Keep telling yourself the people at MIT have no advantage over you
Did you even read my post? I agreed with the opinion that they do, but I'm fine with that.

>>7218153
>implying you can't get laid and also 4chan
lol wizards...

>>7218059
>IQ

7/10, had me semi-convinced you were serious until nearly the end

>>7218059
I never did algebra after second year but I can do the shit in your pic.
I guess that means I didn't go to a shit tier uni.
3rd best for Maths in UK.

>>7218059
> mfw you brag about rings and modules in your pic
> mfw you'll only work in characteristic 0

>>7218313
pic forgotten

There are too many famous mathematicians who didn't go elite universities for undergrad that this pic isn't even worth responding to.

>>7218414
This post*

>>7218059
The questions you posted are extremely trivial. make sense that it's 2nd year university work.

>>7218059
>2nd year university work
>definition of a basis and independent sets

>>7218141
This is the mentality which dominates hormonally driven monkeys. Fucking is just a trick that your biology plays on you to perpetuate the species - any retard, and every retard, that spends time thinking about or persuing fucking is wasting their life. You might as well be a normal fucking consumer wanabee rapper fast food eating shitbag zombie nothing.. which I assume that you are considering your post.

>>7218059
Remember in high school how you thought your GPA was the most important thing ever? Then one year into college you found out no one gives a shit about what you did in high school? The same applies for life after college, no one cares so long as you have the experience and skill set to do the job.

Also, not everyone wants to live in Boston or Bay Area.

you fools, this man is an impostor

>>7218448
> Then one year into college you found out no one gives a shit about what you did in high school?
bullshit.
I had an awful GPA and very good test scores.
Plenty of schools gave a shit about what I did in high school.

And grad schools still care about your undergrad GPA if you're planning on taking that route right after undergrad

>>7218059
>no point in life unless you get a high SAT
Oh look another delusional freshman.

I have the choice to attend an elite university. There are some drawbacks along with positives. The drawbacks are:

1) At the undergraduate level the courses taught tend to provide no more value than a state school's undergrad courses.

2) The cost of tuition and cost per course unit is significantly more than a State school. For instance, one course at this university cost more than the tuition at a good state school in my area.

3) The ability to standout is much less at an elite university. Your fellow students are future leaders in the field. These are future Larry Page's your rubbing elbows with. These classmates of yours are in all likelihood much more talented than you are, and much more serious about their studies than you and are much more prepared than you are.

4) The courses will be harder because the assignments/projects/exams will be harder. You'll end up learning the same concepts at a State school and get a better grade there.

5) Undergraduates are just numbers at most of these places. While elite schools have a small population, it is common for freshman/sophomore courses (weedout ones) to have 200-300 people. No one gives a fuck if you fail one of these classes, they just want your weak ass out of the degree program. Even junior level courses can have 80+ students at some elite colleges.

Pros:

1) Your degree will mean a shitton more than a State degree. People bow down to you for no fucking reason, other than the name of your school.

2) elite jobs will recruit you

3) elite graduate programs will want you

4) You'll make a higher starting salary than your state school peers

5) You'll be seen more as an 'innovator/creator' than a technician/office drone in industry positions.

6) Your recommendation letters will carry a lot of weight because they will be from well-known people in your chosen field.


If you get accepted to an elite university and well-known state college that is a flagship university for cheaper, choose it instead.

>>7218470
>6) Your recommendation letters will carry a lot of weight because they will be from well-known people in your chosen field.

There are lots of well known researchers who don't perform research at elite schools (while I acknowledge there are also a lot in elite )schools)

>>7218489
This is true and I'd like to add to my initial post that it doesn't matter if your recommenders aren't well-known. It is about WHAT they write and not who writes it.

If Prof. A from elite university writes "Anon took my class, he made an A-." -- That'd be a kiss of death.

If Prof B. from non-elite university wrote something like "Anon took my class, he made a B- but his work suffered because he did outstanding research in X field proving Y result, blah blah I'd rank anon the best student I had in the last 5 years, etc." -- then that'd be gold.

Eurofag here, I'm a quantum chemistry major at KU Leuven in Belgium, which is ranked 55th globally by Times, 82nd by QS and 96th by Academic ranking of world universities. Especially the rankings in my field is good.

Seeing that my uni is a top 100 university globally, I guess I would consider it an "elite" university. However, I don't think that's what people on this board mean at all with elite. While my education here is nearly free (about a 1000 bucks a year for a non scolarship student- lel) and it's of a high level, I don't really get all the irrelevant shit people tend to associate with "elite", such as: having lectures in small groups, having a lot of personal contact with "mentor" professors, having vast student facilities, predominantly running into very bright minds on campus etc. And to be honest: I don't give a fuck. In my eyes, a university can be either outstanding or really bad (or something inbetween), but "elite" has nothing to do with the quality of learning offered or any of that stuff, it's just symptomatic of a certain attitude, namely thinking that throwing showers of cash on irrelevant facilities and purposefully being exclusive is a good thing.

>>7218470
Most states usually have one or two decent to good STEM focused schools which are well known at least in the state and often regionally or more. They are usually a better option that the massive state schools which teach everything, though there are still some decent big schools for STEM.

>>7218523
Hi fellow Belgian chemist (UCL here) !

>>7218470
>talented people
Hard work trumps talent, if talent doesn't work hard.

>>7218542
This is one of the best things to ever appear on the internet.

>>7218523
TU Delft here and I approve this message. It seems like much of the academic culture in the US is about throwing buckets of money at it and hoping for the best.

>>7218542
Why do all "nerdy" webcomics come off as smug. This guy and xkcd have their heads really far up their own asses.

>>7218552
TU Delft is based.

>>7218553

MY MAJOR IS PURER THAN YOURS

>>7218552
It's just a noisy minority that really care about this kind of thing, like the kind of people who make troll threads about non-elite schools being useless. Makes some people feel good I suppose.

>>7218553
I don't think this comic is particularly smug though.

Syracuse University Bioengineering major here, how fucked am I?

>>7218442
>implying it isn't easier to get laid in an elite school
>implying ivy fags aren't all a bunch of socialite alcoholics

>>7218566
You're wrong. It's actually a majority of American students who care about whether or not they'll end up in a prestigious university. And I can't say that they're wrong: the standards between universities in America differ so greatly that an engineering degree in one college will give you decidedly less skills than a degree in another. The entire fucking system in America is broken, there's too much of a gap. People think about money first and education second.

Ofcourse this is all "socialist" propaganda from a European.

>>7218442
lol. You'll never have sex.

>>7218542
Working smart trumps working hard. At least if you don't account for what can be gained socially and by sympathy, which is quite a big deal in academia.

>>7218643
i've had sex with lots of women and i agree with that guy

as a cool sex fucker who has done sex on numerous bitches and also has a massive iq, i have to say that you non sex fucker science nerds are pretty shit. i mean personally i do a lot of science, plus sex fucking. so consider that

>>7218666
>Agrees with autistic viewpoints
>Says he's had sex with lots of women

Hookers don't count, just so you know

>>7218680
Of course hookers count! They need to count the cash you pay. How else they gonna check that they are not being fucked over!?

>>7218059
I did that in first year because I did up to Calc III and babby LA in high school.

'top tier' just means the school lets in a shit-ton of negros and cheating chings, and thereby get positive reputation, and government funding.
>>7218164
That's true of 95% of HS ana1 here.

>>7218470

>3) elite graduate programs will want you

Having just slogged through the graduate school application process I've learned that this isn't really true. Where exactly you got your undergraduate degree means far less than how good of a performer you are, whether you have relevant research experience and good projects to show for it, etc.

>>7218687
They are being fucked over you silly. It's their job.

>>7218258

>>7218064
This is true. There are professors of mathematics at "run-of-the-mill" state unis who received their PhDs from top-tier institutions such as Cal-Tech, Cambridge, Harvard, UoChicago, Purdue, Brown, etc, and there are professors of mathematics who received their PhDs from run of the mill state unis. What matters in Pure Mathematics is your area of research, your advisor's connections, your thesis, and your ability to network. If you went to a top-tier institution, but simply focused on your dissertation, which is in a highly-cluttered field, if you're not doing something groundbreaking, then your chances at landing a tenure-track position is just as good as any other post-doc. On the other hand, if you went to a mediocre uni for your PhD, but had a good advisor who works with the best in the field, attend as many conferences in your field as possible, make solid connections with those that went there (without worrying about dick-sizing, and being intimidated), AND work in a new field of research while contributing substantially, then your chances at landing a tenure-track position is likely to be just as good as anyone from an Ivy League school (and he will likely be a friend you made at a conference). Elitism in mathematics at the research level doesn't really exist. What matters most is what you know, and what you can contribute.

The second question in OP is trivial, but I'm not sure about the first. Could I figure it out given I know some general linear algebra? I don't remember ever working through quadratic form stuff in my life, but it doesn't seem to be too difficult. Is there some natural inner product which lends to an orthogonal complement decomposition?

>>7218269

how about you just tell me why i need to have X explained tome in person by an expert to learn it.

>>7218542

The last bit is even better.

>>7218745

Somewhat related question. I am switching from pure math to CS. I am most interested in theory but found there is not as much funding in the department I'm at for theory (little if any) compared to applied research. I feel that even though I'm a theoretician at heart, I may be forced to study some BS applied area of Computer Science. Any advice on how to go about it?

>>7218588
>socialite alcoholics
>mfw I can confirm this is true
watch this if you want to lose some faith in humanity http://www.mrctv.org/blog/video-college-students-dont-recognize-ronald-reagan

>>7218745
you think Purdue is top tier for math?

>>7218523
I agree with you (German here), but lectures in small groups DO help you a lot more than 30+ people lectures.

>>7218311
Imperial?

>>7218191
have u never read griffiths

>>7218311
Another math Imp reporting in

>>7219478
Up until my master's degree, I had classes with the average class size being 100-200 students. Since I'm one of the only two students currently studying quantum chemistry, I have classes with just 3. So I've kind of had both ends of the spectrum there. For me, learning science is all about the hours you put in at home or in the lab, while classes aren't that important. I've learned just as much in 200 people classes as in one with just 3, the only difference being that with the latter group I'm forced to always show up and cooperate, which is tiring.

>>7218542
That example with Feynman was all sorts of retarded. He was tall and had a lower IQ than most scientists as revered as he is but is used as an example of how height correlates with IQ.

>>7219540
Maybe it's different in fields with experimental work, but the classes with 4-5 student I had in maths forced me to work more with the material and the prof actually adjusted the lectures to the students, answered question not directly related to the course and gave us a lot of hints how the material is related to current research. The 30-40 people classes often boiled down to: read book, write exam.
And don't get me started on the 1000+ classes I had in the first semester.

>>7219559
>"prof actually adjusted the lectures to the students, answered question not directly related to the course and gave us a lot of hints how the material is related to current research"

How does that relate to class size? If your professor wouldn't do that in front of a 200 people class, then he's just a bad professor.

>>7219563
If you have 4 students you can just ask what topic they want to discuss and they have a more uniform foreknowledge so he doesn't need longly introductions.

>>7219564
Can't say that I ever recall a professor asking us what we'd like to discuss. Yes, the q&a bit of class is a bit longer, and it's way more interactive with questions, but it's not like he assumes we're his peers all of the sudden. But maybe that's just me

>>7219563
Smaller size facilitates more discussion, and students feel less embarrassed or reluctant to ask questions. You see the same at workshops and conferences: small group of 10-20 specialists vs massive room with 200 people in the same field. I guarantee there is more discussion and questions in the smaller group.

>>7219569
>but it's not like he assumes we're his peers all of the sudden
I would it describe as "He sees his students as actual human beings" instead of exams "corrections waiting to happen". But still lowly students of course.

>>7219572
Well, in the first years of college, we have seminars and other stuff taught by TA's for question asking, all in groups of 10-20 students. Must it be the professor answering dumb questions?

>>7218442
Goddamn, the autism is too strong, I'm cringing.

I really hope you realize that what you're saying is just a way to mentally justify the fact that you're still a virgin. In reality, there is no excuse.

Even if you're ugly, all you need to do is have a good job or be funny. Even if you're cripplingly shy, you will still attract the girls who have a nurturing nature. So if you still haven't been laid, then you're an inferior human being by any definition of "inferior human being".

>>7219605
Bullshit. If you're worse looking than average, you'll get shit not sex. For example if you're balding in your 20s you're fucked up (my experience). You may be lucky if you're shy GIRL not guy. Or if you're at least average looking guy. You're probably 20-something and STILL belive in all that "character matters so much" bullshit. You should be smarter.

>>7219614
I never thought that there are people who take the /r9k/ red pill seriously. You'll realize that the world isn't your enemy once you grow up.

>>7219616
I could be a little autistic. But don't know. Never had any tests.

>>7219605
>So if you still haven't been laid, then you're an inferior human being by any definition of "inferior human being".
Why? If you define your human value by getting laid, you're pretty pathetic. It's just that most people enjoy it, but it's not an obligation to do it, especially for fun, nor does it change your value as a human.
Also, it's an intimate social act, not an achievement, fucking asshole. You're lucky that many girls are too naive to realize you're using them as a trophy to inflate your ego.

I agree that >>7218442 is pretty autistic though.

>>7219626
In the biological way, it's 100% right that getting laid is your only target as a human, but only if result of it are kids. But you have this thing called consciousness, so you could do other things.

>>7219637
>In the biological way, it's 100% right that getting laid is your only target as a human, but only if result of it are kids.
That's true.

Although I wouldn't refer to biology as the right standards of behaviour for humans, because humans are the only species that has passed the point where it's an evolutionary advantage to act on our biology without questioning it.
The game of life has changed, but our biology had no time to adapt. Evolution, however, is all about adapting, if you don't, you die. Yet people still keep propagating old paradigms because "lel it worked in the past".
But yeah, that just a little off-topic on the side.

>>7219553
>He was tall and had a lower IQ than most scientists

You have a lower IQ than most scientist to believe an IQ exam he took in high school was an accurate representation of his overall IQ. He was clearly intellectually gifted, not just gifted but profoundly gifted (above moderately gifted levels which tends to be 130-140 range). Feynman would have score 150+ on any accurate assessment. It would be hard to gauge his true score due to hitting the ceilings of such test. His only downside is his verbal which would have suppressed his overall scores a bit, but IQ exams aren't entirely accurate anyways.

That's second year math in any uni, you fucking idiot.

Even I have seen this stuff, and I do physics.

>>7218442
Are 16?

Go have your crisis somewhere else.

>>7218553
SMBC is not particularly smug. Not often, at least.

>>7218323
m?

>>7218258
I know that feel

>>7219614
>if you're balding in your 20s you're fucked up

Or you can start shaving your head and pull off a tought bald guy look if you are working out too.

>>7218470
>If you get accepted to an elite university and well-known state college that is a flagship university for cheaper, choose it instead

>tfw I got accepted to a state flagship that's also an elite uni and I get to go for free

>These are future Larry Page's your rubbing elbows with
It's coincidentally the one he went to.