coffeeintotheorems

I play the keyboard. Though I'm guessing what you need is a drummer. (Isn't it always...)

What kind of band?

Yeah, you should visit there to get an apartment as soon as you can. I saw quite a few apartments (7-10, maybe) while I was there; coming from a larger (non-college-only) town, I was surprised at how seasonal most of the leases are. Basically, the leases all go from August to August, in step with the school year, and most of the good deals get snapped up early (January, maybe?) by students who know they'll be returning the next year. I'll be paying around $630/mo for a nice studio next to campus. If money is an issue for you, I have heard that there are many considerably cheaper places to live on the bus line, taking as little as 5-10 minutes for a commute. Sarah S--can you back me up on all this?

Ok, I just checked it out last week and it's not nearly as bad as you describe. If you need a sunny paradise like California or a place with lots of green like North Carolina then, yeah, it's going to be rough for you. But it's not nearly this cold, femaleless hell some people describe it as. In fact, when the sun comes out (which it did most of the time I was there) it's actually pretty beautiful. (I didn't pay much attention to the "coeds" while I was there, although if that is one of your priorities then you might want to question how much effort you're willing to put into graduate studies.)

fyi, I just declined my offer at UIC, so funding might suddenly open up for you or someone in a similar situation. (Are you the guy I just wrote to on the math gre forum?)

http://www.mathematicsgre.com/ Everything you need.

Lest this become a thread only for rhetoric and composition... I'll most likely be starting at Purdue this fall to pursue a PhD in Mathematics. (Yes, I'm putting off the decision a few more days.) I went for a visit last week and did some extensive apartment searching. I'm planning to sign a lease with livesay management, in one of their Pearl street studios (a seven-minute walk from where my office will be in the Math building) and will probably drive up again on Fri or Mon to sign in person. Have any of you done research into apartments near campus? I know they're more expensive, but I've decided to splurge my first year. btw, if you haven't found it yet there's an excellent online resource for apt searching near Purdue: http://www.boilerapartments.com/search.aspx

Hey Kash, I was going to link to that article but you beat me to it. Do you follow Quantnet too, by any chance? Zenny: Please read the article Kash linked to, and check out the more general discussion on Quantnet (for example, http://www.quantnet....233/#post-52288 .) Competition for quant jobs is going to be fierce, and you're going to be competing with tons of MFE grads from programs that are either more prestigious than Purdue or are located in easy proximity to the financial hearts of NYC, Chicago, etc. You really shouldn't take out a hefty loan to do only an MS in this specialized field from a second-tier CF program in the middle of nowhere. I second what Xero said about the computer science program being a better bet by allowing you to move into other fields. God only knows what quant finance will look like over the coming decade. On a related note, I'll probably be going to Purdue to pursue the Computational Finance track, but I'll be doing a fully-funded math PhD, so the financial risk for me is lower (and nonexistent, if you don't take into account opportunity cost.)

Interesting point. that never occurred to me. IU Bloomington is great, but I didn't think it was top 10. Most of the people I've observed getting into top 10 programs at least had either publications in real journals, a senior thesis, or at least a few REUs. Only a few I saw had none.

Stansfield, what's your basis for this claim? I would think it would depend greatly on the school and preferences of the adcom. A thesis shows you have research and publication-ready experience. I agree that doing well in lots of graduate-level courses is important, but my impression on test scores is that you mostly just need to make some minimum cutoff and after that a high GRE score carries much less weight than most other factors.

Yes. A lot of important questions with no easy answers. Here are a few places to start your search: http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/680423-colleges-applied-math.html Those are some old rankings in applied math. You'll have to check by department about the most important questions--namely, funding and research interests. http://www.mathematicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=495 http://www.mathematicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=357 These are two decent-sized collection of applicant profiles--grades, test scores, research, undergrad institutions--complete with what schools they were admitted to and which they weren't.

Yule, I just re-read your original post closely, and I may have been a little harsh. I honestly don't know of any FE program that allows quite as much theoretical work as what you are describing; if you don't mind, could you tell us which FE program you're attending? If you want to get a good idea of what kinds of people get into top 10 pure programs, see this: http://www.mathematicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=495 Search the profiles there for words like "MIT," "Princeton," etc. and see what kinds of people did and did not get admitted. Best of luck.

Good God, man, you can't explore professional financial engineering and top-level pure mathematics at the same time, both at the graduate level. I don't care how smart you are; you're going to feel torn on the inside. Make a decision about which path to explore now. And unless your background is utter perfection, there's no way you could move from an FE masters to a top-level pure maths PhD. It doesn't make sense, and like stansfield commented, the profs in the pure maths programs will look at you suspiciously, wondering where you passions lie. You can't direct your energy both places at once.

This revelation about your gender doesn't change anything. A good half of the serious WoW, Halo, cartoon, tv drama, and metal addicts I know are female. Despite my critical tone, I'm genuinely interested in what your motivations are. The people I know whose ambition is to do nothing in life are people I know personally; as such, I have never felt comfortable asking them point-blank why they are that way. I was hoping that through the relative anonymity of the internet, I could get an explanation from you. But I have no idea how to ask, since it seems I have nothing to offer... This notion has absolutely nothing to do with capitalism. If anything, it's the modern anarcho-socialists who frequently ask why people work jobs they dislike when there's so much life to be lived. (Note: those people fascinate me, in a good way, but I'm not yet one of them.) I don't want anybody to be a screw in the machine; if anything, unhappy work makes you just that. I'm also not a fan of antidepressants or therapy, and I'm not in a position to comment on religion.

Wow, man. I'm sorry. That sounds very depressing. Why bother with higher education at all, then? Why not work a minimum-wage job and then dick around on the internet or play WoW and Halo? Or do you have expensive tastes? I've known many people like this (the "Peter Gibbons's" of the world, if you will), but none of them had serious higher education. I want to blame the dopamine addictions caused by television and video games, coupled with bad schooling and bad parenting that keeps people like you from really having the opportunity to explore something worthwhile that they love. What is your motivation to be a "functional member of society?" Morals? Duty? Guilt? Or have you even asked yourself this question yet? I disagree, but I also took P in November 2007 and FM in June 2008 and have no idea if and how they've made the test harder. The P exam seemed really straightforward, but then again I only got an 8. Maybe I made too many careless errors. My experience on FM was: 1) Take associated course (with practice quizzes) to learn the basics, 2) Drop out of course due to boredom and (real) work 3) Let three months pass without studying 4) Wait until the week before the exam 5) Say "Holy sh-- I'd better do something!" 6) Take ALL the practice exams the week before 7) Go into the exam, answer 30 out of 40 questions easily with half an hour left to go 8) Guess on the remaining questions (on weird options and legal issues) 9) Pass with a 7 based solely on the material I knew, by answering questions that were EXACTLY like the practice questions. A common error, both in actuarial work and in basic finance jobs (so I hear.) (Yes, OP, finance can be boring; I have no idea what your friends are telling you.) I definitely learned this the hard way. Again, once you get to be VP you get to make decisions, but that's pretty far down the road.

It sounds like you haven't found a career you really like, then, if the only thing you enjoy is "watching youtube." If you read OPs posts closely, you'll see that he loves Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (?), already owns real estate, and is looking for something he enjoys that will also pay (more) bills. Clearly enjoyment is an important priority in his search. Agreed. I'd say about half the people I talk to in the actuarial track are happy with their work (because they just want simple-minded number crunching that's secure and pays well), and the other half are miserable and only stay for the money if they stay at all. I haven't heard about any crying yet. Out of curiosity, why was your coworker so miserable that she broke down in front of everyone, and what is she doing now? I only took the first two exams (Probability and Financial Math), and I can say with 100% confidence that if you *really* understand the material (which any second-year math major should) and take all the practice exams, you should pass without too much trouble. It's just like prepping for the GRE quant section (only with more advanced material): if you take all the practice exams available and keep a cool head during the test, you should get an 800. Maybe they've made them much harder in the past three years? Ok, in this field that means getting a PhD. An MS simply won't cut it if you want "decision-making" rather than number-crunching. Unless, for example, you go into business and have strong ambitions and a keen entrepreneurial instinct.

Help! We're being overrun by perfectly disciplined math machines with nothing to lose! I heard a similar story from a friend of mine who went to Harvard as an undergrad. He was sitting in on the first week of a difficult Stochastic Calculus class in which the professor and most of the students were Chinese. The professor was having great difficulty explaining a concept in English to a student who wasn't getting it; finally, in frustration he whipped out an explanation in Mandarin, at which point the student understood immediately. My friend didn't go back to the class. (Oddly enough, he was Chinese-American and understood perfectly well. I guess he was overloaded that semester.)

Yes, but this is another example of a field that is rarely intellectually satisfying, where people are frequently "disillusioned with their work" per OP's concern. It's easy to find people who have tried out actuarial work, because it's a field that's so easy to break into; it's much harder to get detailed data (no pun intended) on professional statisticians with PhDs.

In light of this new information, I agree with equinox that if you don't like mathematics or statistics you should not do graduate work in either. You'll be constantly unhappy, won't perform well, and may not finish. Actuarial jobs are certainly doable with only a Bachelors and by a passing a few silly exams on material you won't even use on the job anyway. I'm not sure how bad the employment outlook is *right now*, but I imagine the demand for actuarial work will increase and bounce back to pre-crisis levels (or near that) within a few years. For example, in early 2008 (before the sh-- hit the fan) I easily got an entry-level analyst position with only one exam. That said, if you want to work as an actuary your primary value must be job security and comfortable compensation. The work is not in any way intellectually satisfying (unless you're at or near the top) and is only good if you're trying to provide for your family or "make a lot of money." It sounds like you need to take a step back from this entire conversation and figure out what you really want in life. I can understand wanting to get a "good job," but if you have little understand of what you love then you're going to crash and burn quickly, whether professionally or academically.

Zenny, it sounds like your profile is pretty solid all-around, and I'd be surprised if you didn't get into Columbia. Let us know how it goes. Yes, that's what I've heard. Going to check it out for myself in two weeks. This is slightly off-topic, but which program(s) are you choosing over Purdue's Stats (which, I'm assuming, you got accepted into)?

Is who actually serious? I don't think anyone here has said that. I honestly have no idea, since I have never researched any of Columbia's financial engineering programs. Again, quantnet has a ton of information on the Columbia programs and will probably be able to answer all of your questions about it. Could you give us more detail about your background? CMU Stats is very impressive, so it sounds like you've got the pedigree down. What are your grades, test scores, research experience, and work experience? From what information I've gathered, many do FE masters straight out of undergrad, but work experience is at least somewhat preferred, if not highly preferred. You need to go to New York if at all possible to jump-start this pursuit.

Jesus Christ, man, are you really going to give up that easily? You're, what, 21, 22? You're likely going to have to go to a lower-tier program for your Masters, but if you do really well there--i.e. "start over" and do it right the second time around--you might be able to get into a decent program for your PhD. Oh, and make sure you don't go straight into the Masters from undergrad unless you really, really want it. Maybe work for a year in a crap job so that you'll be very hungry to learn and succeed without messing around or letting yourself get depressed.

You're going to have to do your homework on this one, but I can give you some broad guidance on where to start. 1) I'm assuming you're interested in working in quantitative finance. If this is the case, then you should NOT attend Michigan. I have heard that the job placement statistics for their computational finance masters for the past year or two has only been about 20%...and that's their computational finance program, which you're not even applying to. 2) Check out the forum and information on www.quantnet.com. That is where I got my recent information about Michigan's CF program. Before you post a question on the forum, though, make sure do you do your homework, i.e. search the forum for any and all information about Michigan's program. (Also search their "program selector" and check out their alumnus reviews of the program.) 3) If you're looking at going to Purdue and paying, make sure you know as much as possible about their career services and job placement statistics. Purdue is also in the middle of nowhere, but it is relatively close to Chicago. 4) Not to sound like an a**hole, but why haven't you finished your application to Columbia yet? If you want to enter finance and are planning to take on a serious debt burden, you cannot afford to be irresolute. I may also be attending Purdue this year to pursue computational finance, but I differ from you in three ways: 1) I've been admitted to that Mathematics department rather than Stats, 2) I'm fully funded with a TA, 3) I'm planning to pursue a PhD. For these reasons, I have been thus far more lax about researching the very topics I'm urging you to research (though I intend to ask them more when I visit in a few weeks.) If you find out any more info about Purdue, I'd be interested to hear from you.

Are you paying or are you funded? If you have to pay for all of these, go to Columbia. Its brand name and location have to be superior if you're looking for quant-related work. For more info, see quantnet.com . They're NYC-based, so they're going to have an obvious bias (probably grounded), but you can learn a lot from reading some of the quality info there.

This is a good start; it's pretty important to start off with a sense of purpose. Before you pursue a stats degree any further, you should be have a few very clear application ideas and career goals. Going through such a program, while rewarding, will be very demanding for you both intellectually and financially. Also, the fact that you're a programmer is good and means that you'll be more ready for applied work if you can master the mathematical and abstract concepts. It sounds like your main motivation is curiosity rather than a specific career. In this case, you might want to just study on your own for a few years before thinking about pursuing a degree (unless you somehow have access to an endless pit of money.) The main reasons for a PhD in Stats are 1) to teach and do theoretical research at university (like your friend), and 2) to obtain one of various jobs that involve the title "Statistician," "Epidemiologist," etc. If you're just intellectually curious for now and want to use stats for side projects, then it'll be better to crack a few books, take low-cost courses, and save the MS plans for later. If you think that is "strange" then you're posting on the wrong forum . A majority of the people here were math majors in undergrad; you generally don't do that if you aren't "interested in certain things" for their own sake, without regard to financial rewards. Wait, your Calc I is perfectly solid, right? As in, you can do it in your sleep, right? I don't care about your damn "grade" (although you should aim for As)--I care about whether or not you've developed an intimate understanding of the subject. I don't think you're goal is unrealistic, especially given that you like to explore things on your own. I do, however, think you have a long (but rewarding) road ahead of you in your quest to develop these new skills. Let's face it: math is hard. Always has been, always will be, and there are no shortcuts.