/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #14348282

2MiB, 1604x1118, ff7.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Applying to Mathematics PhD programs

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 04:31:05 2022 No.14348282 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>14348283 >>14348315 >>14348747 >>14350130

How easy or difficult is it to get into the following PhD programs for Mathematics with a 4.0 GPA, perfect GRE scores, and a few research papers at an average state 4-year university? I'm going to apply to all 12 apparently. This is the first stage of my career life.

Rutgers University-New Brunswick
University of Wisconsin-Madison
University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign
Purdue University-West Lafayette
Northwestern University
Northeastern University
Pennsylvania State University-University Park
Ohio State University
Washington State University
Louisiana State University-Baton Rouge
Iowa State University of Science and Technology
Rice University

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 04:34:17 No.14348283 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348282
You would make more in 5 years as an operator than you will at the peak of your earnings without the debt. Lol, just messing with you, not that I was fibbing, what I said was 100% true, but I'm happy for you. You'll get accepted into pretty much all of them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 04:56:24 No.14348313 Report

Quoted By:

Iowa State, Washington State and Louisiana State aren't that hard to get into. The Big 10 schools you listed (Rutgers, Wisconsin, Purdue, Northwestern, Penn State, Ohio State) are a bit more prestigious, but so long as you have a good math GRE and a good GPA, you should get into at least one of them if you apply.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 04:58:23 No.14348315 Report

Quoted By: >>14348747

>>14348282
If you have a perfect GPA and GRE and published research, you should aim higher than these universities, which are well within your reach.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 05:29:38 No.14348356 Report

Quoted By: >>14348357 >>14348451 >>14348978 >>14349578

what does a PhD in math even do
make up higher dimensions of bullshit and contribute absolutely nothing to society?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 05:31:07 No.14348357 Report

Quoted By: >>14348388 >>14348775 >>14348808 >>14349758

>>14348356
>he said, on a device thought of by a mathematician to solve a useless, abstract problem

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 05:49:18 No.14348388 Report

Quoted By: >>14348395 >>14348401 >>14348434 >>14348808 >>14348879

>>14348357
still doesn't explain what a math PhD does
and by that logic we should all love war because it gives as so many brilliant inventions as a consequence of slaughtering millions

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 05:56:24 No.14348395 Report

Quoted By: >>14348415

>>14348388
If you're stupid enough to think those are analogous comparisons then you're not even the kind of person who should be allowed to learn to read and write, let alone be taught science and maths.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 05:59:32 No.14348401 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348388
>Solving an unsolved problem with no applications
>Making up abstract nonsense with no applications
>Giving alternate proofs of already proven statements
>Fact checking that 1+1 is infact 2 by writing a 1000 page axiomatic set theory book

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 06:10:18 No.14348415 Report

Quoted By: >>14348425

>>14348395
they are completely analogous
you're the type of brainlet to think the end justifies the means
>it's okay that we waste time and money thinking of retarded pointless shit because look, in the course of thinking of pointless retarded shit we accidently achieved something
go join your marxist buttbudies in your social sciences: numbers edition circle jerk

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 06:14:38 No.14348425 Report

Quoted By: >>14348752

>>14348415
The first sentence was so stupid I didn't bother reading anything else you wrote. Stop replying, you make the world a worse place every time you write your hot opinions down.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 06:18:50 No.14348434 Report

Quoted By: >>14348752 >>14348776

>>14348388
>intending to kill millions of people is the same thing as doing research where you don't know the answer in advance
holy fuck this board is stupid

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 06:31:45 No.14348451 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348356
Nothing. He'll probably end up in the finance sector like most math PhDs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 10:45:42 No.14348747 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348282
Um, those universities are beneath you. Aim higher like >>14348315 said.

Stupid showoff.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 10:52:18 No.14348752 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348425
>>14348434
I THINK he is trolling. Better yet, I hope he is for the sake of humanity.

Niggers these days..

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 11:08:29 No.14348775 Report

Quoted By: >>14349302

>>14348357
>on a device thought of by a mathematician
Source?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 11:09:47 No.14348776 Report

Quoted By: >>14348786

>>14348434
>Analogies are equivalence classes
You fail at logic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 11:21:08 No.14348786 Report

Quoted By: >>14348794

>>14348776
go on, explain why your analogy works

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 11:24:18 No.14348794 Report

Quoted By: >>14348800

>>14348786
>Everyone who responds to a post is the same person
You're not making a good case for your intellect.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 11:27:18 No.14348800 Report

Quoted By: >>14348808

>>14348794
go on, explain why it's a good analogy
don't be shy

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 11:35:03 No.14348808 Report

Quoted By: >>14348859 >>14348879

>>14348357
The logical structure of this post is that the ends justify the means.
>[X] should happen because it leads to good technology
>>14348388
The logical structure of this post is that the end justifies the means.
>[X] should happen because it leads to good technology
>>14348800
You do realize a majority of medical advances came as a result of treating wounded soldiers. Right? So next time you break your leg, I'll tell you to be grateful for wars. Without wars you likely wouldn't be getting the treatment you need.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:05:00 No.14348859 Report

Quoted By: >>14348864 >>14349652

>>14348808
You're a total brainlet and you're probably so stupid you actually think you've made some form of point.
Clearly implicit to anyone with a brain that isn't the size and smoothness of a boiled egg is that some means are in obviously different classes to others. Funding someone to think about an interesting problem to see what happens is in a very different category to blowing millions of people up so that we might learn some tricks about how to put a leg back together. One explicitly aims to create and explore, while another explicitly intends to destroy and kill millions, for one that should've been obvious.
Did you actually think you sounded smart with that absolute verbal sewage of an argument you just spewed?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:08:09 No.14348864 Report

Quoted By: >>14348879 >>14348899

>>14348859
>interesting problem
Subjective.
>blowing millions of people up so that we might learn some tricks about how to put a leg back together
That's far more interesting to me.

The difference isn't intellect, it's empathy. But you probably conflate the two because you're unable to keep your emotions in check (hence why you think two lines of insults mangled together is an argument).
>One explicitly aims to create and explore, while another explicitly intends to destroy and kill millions, for one that should've been obvious.
Yes, yes, when you generate an analogy between A & B, there are ways in which A & B are not equivalent. Obviously. Analogies aren't equivalence classes---you'll always be able to identify ways in which the two analogous objects are different. By your argumentation, no analogies are valid because no analogy is an equivalence class.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:18:55 No.14348879 Report

Quoted By: >>14348905

>>14348864
I didn't bother giving you an argument because the fact you thought >>14348388 was a reasonable argument made it clear you didn't deserve to be reasoned with. If you draw stupid analogies, you get called stupid, because it's a stupid thing to do.
But, just for sake of argument: the ends justifying the means has absolutely nothing to do with mathematical research anyway. In fact, the entire point of this whole chain was that you don't know the ends, and often have no clue what will achieve what. This has nothing to do with the analogy, even if we throw out nearly everything about the specific example picked, which you resorted to here >>14348808 (and which you wouldn't need to do had the analogy actually been appropriate in the first place), so there's still absolutely nothing of substance there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:30:02 No.14348899 Report

Quoted By: >>14348905

>>14348864
>By your argumentation, no analogies are valid because no analogy is an equivalence class.
if you're serious, you're a massive brainlet kek
being told drawing an analogy between funding research where we don't know the outcome in advance and research as a consequence of wars is bad is not me arguing against analogy, it's me saying this particular analogy could only have been chosen by a retard
also, you're not even using the idea of an equivalence class properly kek
two things can be in the same equivalence class in one way but still different in other ways, so you're just using these words to try sound smart or formal or some shit while the term doesn't even work with your argument kek

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:32:54 No.14348905 Report

Quoted By: >>14348909 >>14348948

>>14348879
>stupid analogies, you get called stupid,
What determines whether an analogy is stupid or not?
>>14348899
>two things can be in the same equivalence class in one way but still different in other ways
Then it's not an equivalence class.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:36:26 No.14348909 Report

Quoted By: >>14348910 >>14348914

>>14348905
>Then it's not an equivalence class.
retard
a straight line is topologically isomorphic to a parabola, and isomorphic objects form equivalence classes
are you telling me you can't tell me the difference between a straight line and a parabola?
and why are you even giving your opinion on mathematicians or maths at all, while you're in here not even able to use such a basic term as an equivalence class correctly? who should give a fuck about your opinion on maths research when you can't even do that right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:37:39 No.14348910 Report

Quoted By: >>14348944

>>14348909
>straight lines and parabolas are equivalence classes
Wrong.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO BTaylor.jpg, 24KiB, 280x340

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:39:14 No.14348914 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348909
>Blocks your path

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1340753422047.gif, 356KiB, 450x295

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:46:05 No.14348927 Report

Quoted By:

I don't think those programs are very popular, so probably not that hard.

You could just cut out the middle man and learn to code now though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:54:06 No.14348944 Report

Quoted By: >>14348946

>>14348910
a parabola is homeomorphic to an open interval
if you don't like that one you can even take the "dude coffee cups and donuts lmao" homeomorphism: you can't tell the difference in another non-topological way? oh no but they were in the same equivalence class, what the fuck, woah
why are you giving your opinion on maths research at all when you don't even know the basics?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:55:07 No.14348946 Report

Quoted By: >>14348952

>>14348944
>homeomorphic
>equivalence class
Wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:56:20 No.14348948 Report

Quoted By: >>14348953

>>14348905
>What determines whether an analogy is stupid or not?
Maybe you should have figured that out before either posting or defending a stupid analogy.
>Then it's not an equivalence class.
brainlet confirmed

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:57:34 No.14348952 Report

Quoted By: >>14348966

>>14348946
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Homeomorphism_Relation_is_Equivalence

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:57:45 No.14348953 Report

Quoted By: >>14348965

>>14348948
>Maybe you should have figured that out before either posting or defending a stupid analogy.
Not an argument. What makes an analogy stupid?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 13:02:19 No.14348965 Report

Quoted By: >>14348969

>>14348953
No shit I'm not arguing with you lol. You're just posting random brainlet shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 13:03:01 No.14348966 Report

Quoted By: >>14350086

>>14348952
On the topological space. It's like saying an analogy between A & B draws an equivalence class between A & B... So long as you restrict yourself only to their similarities and not their differences. Read that proof very closely, and you'll see how they're careful to restrict themselves to a "topological space". It's not an equivalence class (in general)

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 13:04:01 No.14348969 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348965
Say it for the lurkers then. What makes an analogy stupid? You've asserted multiple times the previous analogy is stupid. How did you come to that conclusion? Surely you can support this in an objective way?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 13:07:42 No.14348978 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348356
to the general public it provides mostly nothing of value, but to a sizeable minority (i.e. other mathematicions) it does.

Just like art

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 15:28:26 No.14349302 Report

Quoted By: >>14349420

>>14348775
>Source?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann_architecture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Boole#Symbolic_logic

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 16:27:21 No.14349420 Report

Quoted By: >>14350098 >>14350148

>>14349302
>a mathematician
>links to a physicist, and two computer scientists
Kek

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 17:25:11 No.14349578 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348356
they can teach math to other math PhD's

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 18:05:34 No.14349652 Report

Quoted By: >>14350113

>>14348859
>Funding someone to think about an interesting problem to see what happens is in a very different category to blowing millions of people up so that we might learn some tricks about how to put a leg back together.
Both are a potential waste of resources that can have positive outcomes

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 18:44:59 No.14349758 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348357
>some guy thought of computer science therefore my 10 year research on differential g-genus toroid topology of homo sapiens gluteus maximus is a meaningful endeavor

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 20:52:06 No.14350086 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348966
>how can an interval be a topological space

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 20:54:34 No.14350098 Report

Quoted By:

>>14349420
All 3 were mathematicians retard

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 21:01:28 No.14350113 Report

Quoted By:

>>14349652
One is intended explicitly for research, not intending to waste resources, and the other is intended to do damage and will obviously be a waste of a very large amount of resources.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 21:19:06 No.14350130 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348282
Getting into any PhD program is hard, especially in math where the programs don't have as much money as applied physics or CS. Straight rankings are less important than knowing what department is good at what. Unless it's a top 5, it's rare for a math department to have a fuckton of researchers in every or most popular subfields. But even schools that don't have as much faculty in the topics you like might still have top experts in the field.

Location matters too. For example, Rutgers NB is a very well known combinatorics school, but they have a sizeable amount of people who are well known and good at analysis. This is because DIMACS and IAS (Princeton, aka THE analysis school) interact a lot. Princeton has a lot more normie prestige, but in the world of math, both Rutgers and Princeton are prestigious. So even if you wanted to do analysis but only got into Rutgers, you could likely reap the benefits of being so close to Princeton, the least of which would be to physically drive to Nassau Street and talk to their analysis researchers in person.

So it really comes down to narrowing down the stuff you really care about studying NOW, finding researchers you like, and then filtering for location / opportunities. You need to focus on networking with other professors and grad students ASAP in grad school, otherwise it'll be really hard to pump momentum towards TT (tenure track). Collaboration is a free way to get a paper trail as well as a new contact. Do it as much as you can while focusing on your topic. Research papers + great GPA + great GRE scores means your stats are more than fine (school matters less as long as you took honors / enough grad classes). Now all you have to do is focus hard on arguing why you're a good fit for wherever you're headed.

According to your interests:
>identify 2-3 massive reach schools
>identify 3-4 of the schools on this list
>identify 2-3 schools you think you could absolutely get into
Good luck anon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 21:31:40 No.14350148 Report

Quoted By:

>>14349420
>physicist, and two computer scientists
subsets of math

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches