SlantedAndDisenchanted

Thanks for your help and responses. I guess my *somewhat flawed* line of thinking was that if I aced a harder math sequence it may make up from my B- in multivariable back when I used to smoked weed instead of going to class. But, I see now that the easier sequence makes the most sense!

Plus, the Real Analysis class is not really graduate level ( It uses baby Rudin), it is more of a mixed undergrad/grad class. So, maybe for Stats people it would be considered graduate analysis...but math majors at my school take it their senior year if they want to do a PhD, I'm told. Maybe that explains the level of the class with more clarity.

I have just taken Linear Algebra as part of a combined Lin. Alg/ Diff Eq. I could take a junior/senior level Applied Linear Algebra class instead of the second semester of Advanced Calculus/ Real Analysis. But, I figured analysis would be better. All of my engineering classes/job incorporate a ton of linear algebra, so I already know all about the stuff.

Yeah. I realize it will be a big jump, so I'm self-learning over the summer. I am 75% of the way through "How to Prove It" by Velleman, and then I am going to start "Understanding Analysis" by Abbott (1D Real Analysis book). After that I think I may be ready. Is Apostol on the same level as Rudin? Or is it easier ? Thanks for replying!

Well, I'm a current Master's student in the computational aspects of engineering presently. I would say that depending on what you'd want to focus on, there could be a lot of overlap. For the mechanics side of things, finite element (especially in flow problems), as well as control theory and the linear algebraic applications therein can supply quite the hardy amount of applied math. Granted, not at the rigor of a graduate level applied math program. But my mechanical engineering master's classes (at the University of Minnesota) has very little in the form of requirements. I took 3 classes on the theory of finite elements which exposed me to a lot of numerical linear algebra, proving errors of certain discretization schema, and then my electives were in computing algorithms (numerical, and general) in the computer science department. I felt like my background tended towards the applied physics/math side of engineering and I felt like I could have got that in applied math, perhaps. On a side note of jobs, I know that there is a lot of work on the heavy-computational side of engineering (if you enjoy simulations) which allow you to do that sort of thing. Applied Math jobs I see are usually in finance, or signal processing/algorithm design on that end. Engineering is more stable, with a chance of getting a less math-y job. Your mileage may vary of course. I would say the MechE at a better university may be a better option UNLESS you're pursuing a PhD afterwards.

Hi, I have recently hit a bit of a quandary. So, I'm sure some of you may be able to relate to focusing on a perhaps trivial choice and wondering if it could impact one's chances of getting into grad school. I am looking to apply to Biostats PhD programs in a couple of years. For next year I have the option of taking Advanced Calculus I and II or Real Analysis I or II. Advanced Calculus (essentially undergrad real analysis?) covers similar topics like differentiation, limits, and integration. Analysis covers the whole spiel in R^n so it definitely would be better to take that option. Real Analysis at my school covers baby Rudin where Advanced Calculus uses a textbook at the level of Fitzpatrick's Advanced Calculus. My question is whether it will matter at all what sequence I take? I may not be able to get admission into Real Analysis due to my self-taught (aside from Calc 1-4) background. My supposition is that getting an A in an advanced calculus sequence would be better than getting a B+/A- in real analysis. But, I'm not sure. I am taking these to take up for my poor calculus grades in undergrad (currently a Master's student in Engineering). Any advice would very much be appreciated. Thanks, Disenchanted

oh, really? That seems antagonistic to what I have seen on this board. Considering you haven't taken two semester's of real analysis and a prob theory sequence I'm rather nonplussed. Although you may have had exceptional research experience/LOR's? That is great news though. I'm hoping to stay in my home state of Minnesota, so that would be awesome!

Thanks for your advice! Pavement is rad. Always will be my favorite rock band!

Hey all, I'm a current Master's student in Biomedical Engineering at a top 25 school. I am looking at applying to Biostatistics programs within the next couple of years, and was wondering if anybody could provide insight into how delusional it is to switch fields like this. Undergrad GPA (Bioengineering) : 3.43 Grad GPA (Bioengineering) : 3.90 Because I'm minoring in Statistics, I will have a Master's level Stat Theory sequence finished, as well as an Advanced Calculus sequence (which is akin to undergrad Real Analysis) finished. So, I'm not completely underprepared mathematically speaking. I didn't perform well in undergraduate calc classes (B+ average in math/stat in undergrad), but I did work full time all through school and my master's degree. I have a letter writer (my Master's advisor) who said he will write that I worked full time in my letter of rec, so is it probable that that could maybe distract away from my subpar undergraduate GPA in math classes? My master's work is all in computational physics/biology ( not at all prob/stat related ), and my job is in computational physics as well. Hence, I believe this stuff works to my detriment (obviously). But is it better than having no research experience at all? I was thinking it would be easier for me to apply to Master's programs in Biostat first, and then once I've finished it, apply to other PhD programs (or a program which allows preferential admission to a PhD afterward). If anybody could respond and let me know whether I have a prayer, I would appreciate it! Thanks, Disenchanted