[ 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: 74 KB, 651x568, jacobbarnett.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6543181 No.6543181 [Reply] [Original]

>be an undergrad at a small state school
>want to become a mathematician
>dream of working on the Langlands program

Is there any hope? Or do you have to be a prodigy at Harvard to be able to make it anywhere working on that kind of mathematics?

>> No.6543191

No, hard work conquers all. Most the the really great scientists didn't have particularly superior intelligence from an early age, but rather developed it through years of obsessive work.

>> No.6543200

>>6543191
All the great scientists and mathematicians had both - very high intelligence and hard work.

>> No.6543223

>>6543200
[citation needed]

>> No.6543229

>>6543200
The correlation between precocity and later scientific success--or more specifically, the near-complete lack of it--suggests otherwise.

>> No.6543234

OP don't let these responses discourage you.

Do you know about the law of attraction? It says if you want something and try hard enough to achieve it. you will achieve it.

Keep your eyes on the prize and have fun with your mates from time to time. If you're near london lemme know, I am studying Math too

>> No.6543241

>>6543200
>All the great scientists and mathematicians had both - very high intelligence and hard work.

Not really. Go read some of Paul Halmos' books. He wasn't very smart.

In fact he failed his philosophy courses, couldn't finish his thesis and was told he was too stupid for philosophy by his professors and that he should switch majors lol.

So he switched to math. In math he was getting B's and C's in his first year....

Then he decided to take it seriously, became obsessed with math and put in the work and became pretty famous and successful.

>> No.6543242
File: 1.97 MB, 154x273, 1395376175932.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6543242

>>6543234

>> No.6543244

>>6543241

>based Paul Halmos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONvYPldXoZs

>> No.6543249

I'm working on this integral

int 1/(x-1+sqrt(x^2-2*x+2)) dx

and I'm substituting x - 1 = sinh(u)
now what is dx?

>> No.6543262

>>6543181
>prodigy at Harvard

Even then you'll have to spend 10 years as a postdoc, you'll have no prospect of permanent employment and often must obtain a new postdoctoral position and move every two years.

>> No.6543271

>>6543200
>All the great scientists and mathematicians had both

All 50 of them, yes

There are thousands of working scientists out there in the world in academia. They're all extremely motivated and hardworking. That's all you need.

That one in a million dude that has not only motivation, but fierce natural intelligence, is a rare occurance (and a lucky son of a bitch). That's why they're so famous and well known.

>> No.6543272

>>6543241
>He wasn't very smart.

That explains why I never heard of him.

>> No.6543280

>>6543249
Just a guest, could it be dx=cosh(u)du?

>d/dx(sinh(u))=d/dx(x-1)
>cosh(u)du/dx=1
>cosh(u)du=dx

Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not yet a this level of math.

>> No.6543282

>>6543272
If you haven't heard of Paul Halmos, it's because you don't have much breadth in your algebra and logic knowledge. His books are some of the most recommended in the subjects.

>> No.6543290

>>6543282

He's actually a good writer.

"I want to be a mathematician" was a fun read

>> No.6543400

Go fuck yourself, all of you with your delusional hard work mumbling.
It's fucking delusional to believe that hard work can get you anywhere if you don't have the genetical disposition for the tasks.

You Egalitarians make me sick.

>>6543241
>He took only three years to obtain the degree, and was only 19 when he graduated.

>> No.6543449

>>6543400
Almost everyone I know finished their core curriculum in undergrad in 3 years, and stuck around for the fourth just to take electives. Age didn't seem to have anything to do with intelligence, so much as whatever the age cutoffs for HS/MS/Elementary were in their home state.

>> No.6543509

>>6543449
Typical smug bastard speaking.

>hoohey, look at this, I cruised through it easily, and everyone I know did so too. It's not hard

>> No.6543941

>>6543509
I'm not being smug. Most undergrad work can be completed within 3 years, if you discount the fluff which can usually be tested out of. Have you gotten to senior year of undergrad yet? If you plan things right, it's more of a blowoff year than HS, in terms of work, since you're mostly working on senior projects/grad applications. I took 3 classes senior year because I was done with all requirements and I'm average smart.

>> No.6543946

>>6543941
4 years minus testing out of english, calc I & II, and a few other basics like language courses from AP tests, there you go, 3 year undergrad, done.

>> No.6543950

>>6543181
Anon, by the time you do your grad program no one will give a single fuck where you did your undergrad. Don't worry, just work hard, make connections, and don't lose sight of your goal.

>> No.6543969

>>6543400

he still failed philosophy and did shitty in his math courses at the start.

By all accounts /sci/ would call him a retard at that point.

It's only after he became obsessed with some math topics that he started getting good grades and coming up with good ideas.