vonLipwig

If a number is divisible by a and b, then it is divisible by lcm(a,b ). (Lowest common multiple). It is not necessarily divisible by the product ab. For example, 60 is a multiple of 12 and of 10, but is not a multiple of 120. Similarly, looking at the powers of two, something that is a multiple of 4 and a multiple of 2 doesn't need to be a multiple of 8. (For example, the number 4). This is the issue in this question.

I have no firsthand knowledge of this, but everyone seems to say that you just have to not do badly. I would imagine that that score is fine.

Depending on the student, you may be able to make some progress by just talking to them - explaining that they need to stick to questions related to what you're talking about in class, but you're happy to talk about other stuff afterwards. This might at least reduce the frequency of interruptions and/or help you to shut them down faster when they do happen.

Yes, I agree. Don't worry at all about the experimental section - just do your best to answer the questions.

I have no particular knowledge of what admissions committees would be thinking, but I don't think it makes sense for you to give an excuse that: - Anyone could make - Is unverifiable - Makes you look a bit silly If you think those four points or so are likely to make a difference, then you might need to take the test again, unfortunately.

I'd also suggest asking some academics at your current university for advice. They'll have a much better sense of how strong these universities are than we will.

From the following webpage: http://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/scores/understand/ From this, it seems that equal scores would be given equal ranks, but that rank might shift as more people take the test.

I also found the Princeton book very helpful, because it knew how much detail I needed to know about the various extra areas (complex analysis, for example).

No worries - good luck with the test!

This is false. Your test will contain three sections of one and two of the other, as well as the analytical writing, but only two of each section will count towards your score, and you are not told which two those are. My assumption is that the other section contains new questions which they are calibrating for difficulty.

It really depends on the problem. What is it?

I was actually a bit more aggressive about it - even when the box on the application form wanted a GPA out of 4.0, I entered N/A, or 0.0 or something, and then explained it in the next "Is there anything else you want to tell us?" box. Of all my applications (10ish), I only once was faced with a box that wouldn't accept N/A or 0.0 or anything, so I actually had to make up some kind of conversion (I just did proportional, eg 80% = 3.2/4.0) and then told them that in the next comments box. They're not going to be unused to this scenario - I wouldn't worry too much about it.

In a similar situation, I gave my marks out of 100, and explained it in the little comment boxes, rather than trying to convert.

I would suggest you ask an academic at your current university for advice. They are more likely to have experience with similar students and to know more about various universities.

Doing a PhD in an area which you are not interested seems like a pretty bad idea to me. Do you know what is involved?