/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6380250]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQXhNI7cyCQ

Question for /sci/'s math PhDs: How true is this video?

[Anonymous No.6380272]

>/sci/'s math PhDs

Non-existant, try some Russian board. (If I recall correctly there has been one here a couple of months ago)

[Anonymous No.6380274]

This video is fucking retarded. I don't know if it's really trying to prove something or if it is just trying to make a joke, but the point I think it's trying to prove is ridiculous.

Firstly, not all of pure math is "useless."

Secondly, the employment opportunities of a pure math grad depend on 1) the individual and 2) whether they want to be in academia. If you truly want to be in academia the employment opportunities are endless.

Also, if you love math, FUCK what anyone else says. You can do math if you want. This video is highly discouraging and obnoxious.

[Anonymous No.6380292]

>>6380274
>If you truly want to be in academia the employment opportunities are endless.
Uh... no. The employment opportunities are very limited in both quantity and quality, so what you can look forward to is vicious competition (and I mean vicious -- people will lie, cheat, and steal your work) for low-paying jobs with no job security and little prestige.

The tenure system is on the way out. It just doesn't make sense for the universities when there's such an oversupply of qualified academics to offer such favorable terms of employment.

[Anonymous No.6380301]

Math PhD's are exclusively >150IQ. No one here is even remotely authorized to have any say on what does and doesn't go.

[Anonymous No.6381016]

>>6380272
I know there were some math PhDs here in the past.

[matsci !!invJra9x72G No.6381073]

>>6380274

Academia is a shitshow right now, at least in the sciences. The number of graduates coming out of the top five schools in any given area are enough are enough to fulfill available faculty positions (although group reputation > school reputation).

>>6380292

I think groups are going to get larger and larger, like the system in Japan, where one professor has a very large group, with associates professors under him/her, then postdocs, then students. It's already happening to some extent, there are a lot of very large research groups that just keep getting bigger, with postdocs acting as advisors.

I wouldn't be surprised if they changed tenure, at least in the sciences. Traditionally, it was supposed to give freedom to speak your mind, research what you want without censorship. The way it is now, tenure really doesn't get you a whole lot of perks with respect to your research, because most of what you are able to accomplish is tied to grant funding. I have mixed feelings on this; grants tend to homogenize research, make you focus on short term projects that will definitely produce results instead of trying high risk/higher reward type research.

[Anonymous No.6381097]

>>6380250
>Why do you want a PHD in pure mathematics?
>Because I'm good at math but don't know how to apply it.

[Anonymous No.6381453]

>>6380250
no its not true because blondes are not good at math

[Anonymous No.6381463]

>pure math
>convince your PI to...
>PI

-1/10, video is created by someone who doesn't know what they're talking about

[Anonymous No.6381512]

>>6380250

You'll have a social life, it'll just be with other graduate students.

You have to solve problems that don't have answers but that aren't entirely worthwhile because no one else worked on them first.

He's right that pure math is pretty useless unless. Unless you love the stuff do applied math research and get a job at a research lab making good money.

You would never have to delete years of work anyway, most problems are managed in chunks and if you haven't made meaningful progress on something in 7 years then you wouldn't have a job. You'll still have come up with useful methods even if you don't solve a big problem. It's also worth noting that major problems are usually worked out over years if not decades (in some extreme cases centuries) by newer methods being created and older methods being refined.

No one is going to demand funding back, it's almost always NSF (government) money anyway and so long as you were making positive contributions you would get funding.

Most of these videos are just made by people who realized they didn't like it later or didn't go to that good of a grad school. If you want real advice if you can make it into an ivy league school for grad then do whatever you want, if you can make it into a big ten school then do applied, if you can't do that then you should just get a job in industry and not waste your time.

[Anonymous No.6383000]

>>6381463
What is a PI? What does the abbreviation mean?

[matsci !!invJra9x72G No.6383021]

>>6383000

Principal investigator, also called advisor, also called boss.

[Anonymous No.6383110]

I assume noone would fucking ever go into puremath for any practical reason or hopes of practicality. Youd do it because you enjoy math. A game.

[Anonymous No.6383260]

The only good one of these was the original PhD in the Humanities.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obTNwPJvOI8

[Anonymous No.6383477]

>>6380250
>PhD in Math
>Become financial analyst at JPMorgan
>1 mil starting
>300 bitches starting

[Anonymous No.6383481]

>>6383477
That's applied math. Applied math gets you the high salary jobs. Pure math is useless shit like number theory, algebraic geometry or foundations of logic, almost philosophy tier.

[Anonymous No.6383485]

>>6383481
*tips ellipsoid*

[Anonymous No.6383592]

>>6380301
>If you truly want to be in academia the employment opportunities are endless.

You are out of your mind.

[Anonymous No.6383597]

>>6381073
>make you focus on short term projects
Yes and no... what I've seen mostly is that it keeps people in a rut. Do a decent piece of work, then spend many years tweaking it a bit. Milking it.

[Anonymous No.6383604]

>>6383481
>Implying number theory isn't needed for cryptography.
>Implying cryptography jobs don't pay a shit-ton.

[Anonymous No.6383606]

>>6383477
Fuck money, get bitches.

[Anonymous No.6384997]

>>6383604
Cryptography doesn't need much number theory. Most of number theory is considered useless because it has no applications.