[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 68 KB, 768x512, 1283016448768.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1739610 No.1739610 [Reply] [Original]

Hey /sci/, I'm in math/bio and I have a choice between taking complex variables, combinatronics, and probability. Which is the most useful/funnest course?

>> No.1739618

>>1739616
The picture is not me, it's little lamb, some bitch from virginia

i thought you guys liked math

>> No.1739616

trololol

>> No.1739624

Complex variables

Combinatorics/Probability are pretty mickey mouse and if you ever need to use them they're easy to self teach.

Complex variables is harder, but more rewarding.

>> No.1739633

>>1739624
>Complex variables is harder, but more rewarding.

and also fucking useless

>> No.1739640

I guess CV it is then. anyone here in the math/bio field?

>> No.1739689

>>1739610

Combinatorics is the most fun easily, and you'll learn a bit of probability (IMO the best bits anyway) if you do it well.

It isn't mickey mouse.

Plus if you're in maths bio, you're probs gonna need to learn to program a bit, which is useful for combinatorics, not so much for CV.

Then again I'm biased

>> No.1739695

>>1739633
how do you define useful?

>> No.1739735

>>1739689
I'm only speaking from experience when I say it's mickey mouse. It's a banker at my uni, people do it because it's the easiest course at its level.

OP
What level is this going to be? first/second/third/fourth year?
If you're doing math/bio then you will probably find complex variables more useful if you go gor future research in anything that involves fluid flow or solving ODEs.
At my uni at least, the course is all about conformal mappings, and fluid flow through porous media. I took it along with Environmental mathematics and mathematical physiology, and it helped a lot.

All depends on what you wanna do.

>> No.1739746

Combinatorics fucking rocks. First you learn to count, then you raise pigeons, and then you end up colouring and making designs.

>> No.1739755

>>1739735

Where'd you go? I'm about to start a PhD in combinatorics, but we never did anything except a little bit of graph theory in the final year, then I did a shitload during my (What will be in october) MMath

>> No.1739776

>>1739695
how broadly it's applied in real world applications

inb4 hurr derp Fourier analysis, you don't need a complex variables course for that

>> No.1739778

>>1739755
Done an MMath at Oxford. The option in 4th year is Graph Theory / Probabilistic Combinatorics.

I know personal ability/preference makes a lot of difference, but the general consensus was it was the easiest module to take.

That's cool you're going to do a PhD. Where will that be? You know roughly what you're doing it on yet? (as in what part of combinatorics)

>> No.1739803

>>1739776
you only learn things that are applicable in real world situations?

wow, that's sad man. I learn what I find interesting.

But FYI, complex variables is a very useful course.

Plemelj formulae, Cauchy integrals, Wiener Hopf method, complex Fourier transform.

I mean come on, the Wiener Hopf method is used extensively in applied mathematics/physics.

>> No.1739824

>>1739778

I mean, I thought it was the easiest option, but I did well enough to get offered EPSRC funding, so I don't know how else it's perceived.

Cambridge under and now post-grad.

No idea what I'll be doing. My supervisor mainly does work in ramsey theory, but it could be anything.

>> No.1739839

>>1739803
>you only learn things that are applicable in real world situations?
more or less

Because my parents are not millionaires and I'm not fucking crazy.
Also, real world applicability goes a long way.

>> No.1739847

>>1739824
Ah, you filthy tab!

That's cool, good luck with it all. I have to admit, graph/combin was easy exam wise, but the end of each course was way beyond me. 2deep4me

>> No.1739849

>>1739839

Meh, if you want to make money, become a banker (pro-tip: It's not hard with a good maths degree).

If you want to be an academic, why do you give a shit for it's real-world applications? Do what interests you.

>> No.1739856

>>1739839
My parents aren't millionaires. In fact quite the opposite.

Each to their own though. I don't understand what you have against complex variables though, EVERYONE who is taking applied mathematics courses in 4th year at my uni takes it. It's pretty much compulsory.

>> No.1739876

>>1739847

Heh, you should have seen the course Tim Gowers lectured, arithmetic combinatorics.

First third, discrete fourier analysis, second third Szemeredi's regularity lemma, final third Frieman's theorem. Ostensibly to show three different proofs of Roth's theorem.

It was only a bloody 16 hour course.

>> No.1739887

>>1739856
in my understanding OP has a choice

>>1739849
The whole point is that I don't want to waste my life on stupid shit, be that abstract mathematical circlejerkery or banking.
But of course I despise bankers 1000x more.

>> No.1739895

>>1739887
and I don't want to devote my life to making money.

>> No.1739929

>>1739895
let me put it this way, money contributes only as a means of being able to afford major risks in life (like trying to become an academic mathematician)

us poor people don't have too many shots at this, you know

there are other considerations as well that I'm just too lazy to type in at the moment, let's just say the progress in this era will be defined by applied technology and not "holy texts in monasteries" that have been around for millenia for people to think about

>> No.1739945

>>1739929

Again disagree. I've got government funding at every stage of my academic career. Each qualification has basically increased my employability and salary range should I decide to enter employment after I graduate rather than academia.

I would definitely agree that to some people from disadvantaged backgrounds this isn't made clear enough and people are worried about the level of debts students can get into, but I think these worries are generally misplaced.

>> No.1739960

>>1739945
>Each qualification has basically increased my employability

I'm not sure if this is naiveté or just stupidity talking

but anyway, you'll be very surprised

>> No.1739968

>>1739929
>us poor people don't have too many shots at this, you know

No, I don't really know what you mean.
I'm from what most would consider a "poor" background. (Got maximum government funding, and university bursaries), but I still see no need to sacrifice learning what I find interesting in order to learn what I think will make me money.

I worked hard to get into university, I'm not going to waste this opportunity by learning what I think is financially rewarding in the long run.

Especially when it comes to maths. You could pick the most abstract corner of the most abstract area and make a career out of it. If it interests you, run with it. Academia is pretty cushty once you get into it properly.

>> No.1739978

>>1739960
How could it work any other way?

Look at the average wages for people graduating with:

BSc in hard science
MSc in hard science
PhD in hard science

The more qualified you are, the more employable. They said nothing about being able to walk into any job they want, you obviously need a CV to boot.

You are the one that will be surprised.

>> No.1739988

>>1739960

I'm not a moron, about 80% of my friends have graduated and gone on to work in the city, I'm well aware of how the job market works, especially for city jobs.

The people I've known to go into banking or consulting after doing a PhD have gone in at a higher level in the company and generally not been involved as much in the shitfeast that is the graduate recruitment pool.

Shit, I know some people who's company's force them to do some postgrad study (admittedly more business specific) after a few years.

>> No.1739990

just take AP Calc and AP stats

>> No.1739992

>>1739978
>Look at the average wages for people graduating with

they don't pay those wages for your degrees, idiot

people with proper skills, specializations AND degrees get any wages to begin with

the rest are forced to go back to school and get a degree/specialization that will make them employable, but that doesn't show in you statistics

>> No.1739999

>>1739992
That's a straw man, I didn't say they paid you for the degrees, I said a degree makes you MORE employable.

I don't see how you could possibly think otherwise.

>> No.1740008

>>1739999
>a degree makes you MORE employable.

like a PhD in abstract math? get real, man!

>> No.1740013

>>1740008

As opposed to an undergraduate degree in....abstract maths?

You're not employing them for their knowledge, it's graduate recruitment, you're employing them for their potential.

>> No.1740015

>>1740008
Another straw man.

If you have a PhD in abstract maths the job you're more than likely applying for is academic.

People who doctorate in abstract math are usually in it for the long haul.

>> No.1740020

>>1740013
>You're not employing them for their knowledge, it's graduate recruitment, you're employing them for their potential.

you must be living in a communist shithole somewhere

clearly, we're talking about two different world here ...

>> No.1740033

>>1740020
>>1739960
>>1739992
>>1740008

Let me guess. You went to a shit tier university, got a shit degree and failed a few job interviews? Ended up getting a job at a generic city firm for 2 years on £22k?

>> No.1740036

>>1740020

Yeah, I'm talking with the benefit of experience here. How many of your close friends have recently been hired by the graduate recruitment programs of top city firms?

>> No.1740052

probability basically is combinatorics, except watered down.

I would go with combinatorics, imo it is one of the funnest parts of math.

>> No.1740056

>>1740015
>If you have a PhD in abstract maths the job you're more than likely applying for is academic.

>People who doctorate in abstract math are usually in it for the long haul.

have you even read the thread? we've already covered all this, that's all we're talking about: abstract math degrees >>1739929

so fuck off with your "straw man" accusations, you cunt.

>> No.1740069

>>1740033
let me guess, you're a useless piece of shit British welfare queen who has no idea how the real world works

enjoy the tightening of the belt in your country, dipshit

>> No.1740074

>>1740069
I have a job.
I know you haven't got a degree or a decent job as you're evidently about 15 years old.

>> No.1740076

>>1740036
>graduate recruitment programs of top city firms?

'the fuck you're talking about, dear foreign friend?

>> No.1740081

>>1740074
>I have a job.

won't last too long, you welfare leech

>> No.1740086

>>1740076
Why are you arguing about something when you evidently:
i) have no experience with it
ii) have no idea what you are talking about

>> No.1740087

>>1740076

I have no idea what you don't understand about that, it's pretty clear.

>> No.1740092

>>1740081
Pray explain, how exactly am I a welfare leech when I have a job and pay (fucking loads of) tax?

>> No.1740094

>>1740052

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_analysis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_theory

as you can see combinatorics is the best, with complex analysis second best.

>> No.1740100

>>1740087
let me get this straight

you're supposed to study abstract math just be hired by a hedge fund?

I'd stick to applied math, thanks, morons

>> No.1740102

>>1740094
Complex analysis =/= complex variables btw.

>> No.1740106

>>1740092
I'm assuming you're the moron who left this comment >>1740015

>> No.1740109

>>1740100

Yeah actually, I know at least two people who have done just that.

>> No.1740112

>>1740106
No i left this >>1740033
and you didn't answer my question. How am I a leech?

>> No.1740127

> PhD in Math
> any job i want
> $300k starting

But seriously, does anyone know an unemployed mathematics doctorate?

>> No.1741770

OP here, bumping this thread

>> No.1744005

i need more little lamb, i want to eat a lamb sandwich

>> No.1744013

usefull probability
fun complex variables

i mean taking math/bio and not studying dynamics and complex variables is a fucking waste of time.

A lot of science in bio is done using probability, sure yeah that works for business in biotech and whatnot.
but if you want to be in the cutting edge.. go cvar.