Agradatudent

Really completely depends where you go and who you work with. Even in those fields, there are very pure people and very applied people. So it's possible you'd spend 80% of your time doing pen and paper research, and then occasionally coding up numerical simulations to back up your data. There's also a chance it's close to 50-50, but you have to do something on paper to get to coding. Unless you're just extremely applied.

After spending too much time on the internet, I am of the opinion that people lie about much less...

I'm confused as to why this is in the math section...

I personally don't enjoy mathematicsgre.com whether it's a better source or not. The "applicants" you see are sometimes so overwhelmingly strong that you have to wonder if they're lying or not.

Can't accept both.

If you are doing any math, applied or otherwise, you really have to take Analysis and Algebra. Cryptology relies on number theory which is married to algebra and analysis (depending on the direction you go). Without those two classes, no program can accurately judge your aptitude.

I agree the OP would most likely be fine, but I think for the OP's own good down the line he should learn the basic logic constructs.

It never hurts to have a background in logic. The book most likely won't stress things like contra positive and the subtlety of proving if and only if

I have heard that book is manageable. Instead of reading it, I recommend reading a book like introduction to proofs by chartrand (sp?) and not only read it but do every exercise that's how you actually prepare. Reading doesn't do much. You must engage the material

I would agree with tyler. Even if they allow you to do so, you may not want to. If you are at a school who's intro to analysis course uses baby Rudin, you really don't have much of a chance to get a decent grade. Without being used to doing proofs and having a level of "mathematical maturity", it will be ridiculously difficult to keep up. Not only that, but a book of that level will thrust you into many topics past analysis, including topology which you already mentioned. I think you should take the prereq regardless. Your background really just says you can do engineering, and it says nothing about upper level mathematics involved in statistics. Remember, if the disciplines were so similar, they wouldn't be separate.

As a grad of UMD, I can tell you they frequently say one thing and do another.

For math, I used the Kaplan book and NOVA's GRE Math Prep Course. The Nova book had alot of extra stuff you'd never need for the test, but was nice anyway. The Kaplan book is sufficient for the test I think. The nova just had more practice. I don't know too much about the new GRE but the Kaplan book is very helpful for the old so I assume it's fine for the new. JUST MAKE SURE YOU READ ALL THE SECTIONS!!!

Okay, the results will definitely prove if the econ research counts for future applicants!

careful with that, that's how you get mugged

I think for some of your schools you aimed alittle too high. Those schools are interested in people with more classes in statistics and more research in statistics. Research experience is good but it's preferred (and sometimes only applicable) if it's in the field you apply to. NCSU, Irvine and Minnesota I think are your more likely candidates. Without the Math GRE those grades won't mean as much if the school is unknown and unranked. They could be much easier than other classes, and they have no way to know. Did you have any publications or results from working on a project that long? That might help alittle, but in math and stat they generally do not care much about other fields. Your classes you are taking are also all over the board. Alot of comp sci, pure math, some applied, and statistics. I would venture that you should have been taking alot more stat, and just focus on real analysis and possibly algebra from the pure side. But we'll see, I'll be interested in seeing how you do.

You are all over the board. I'm not sure if a physics PHD student would have a good enough mathematical background for a phd in pure math. Applied is possible, but it's just totally different areas. You need to give us more details on your backgrounds.

I mean, I also think Gentlelife assumes to much. My dad has thrown family members out of the house who show up uninvited on holidays. If they didn't want you there, they wouldn't try to push you into bed, they'd push you out the door.

You're going to grad school and you still assumed this?

Seems about right for Chem.

I would give advice but I don't run into this. My supervisor is jewish.

You really do not have enough experience for a statistic PHD. You should if anything enroll in classes at a local university as a non-degree seeking. You have alot to take before you'll be ready for a masters program.

Complex Variables, You will run into the i in statistics.

Your undergrad doesn't matter really. You should be getting involved in as much research as possible and that will trump any MS. You should be doing REUs and get involved with research during the semester. You will be much more prepared that way as well.

That is the total opposite of all the feedback you were given.

you could just flip your spiral or bound notebook around and write the other way... (and upside down)