How helpful is real analysis II?

[warriorshame]

I took the first class in a two quarter real analysis sequence at my school. The class used rudin, and covered up until continuity. However, at that time I was a math minor and lazily took real analysis 1 for a pass/no pass grade (which is allowed for math minors). Obviously I passed, but how bad does this look to adcoms? Is it worth it to take real analysis II for a grade in place of a statistics, probability, mathematical economics, or game theory course? Ideally I could take all of them, but I may not get the chance because of time constraints. what do you guys think?

[econandon]

It is a good signal to have a graded proof based course. If you can manage to get a good grade in real analysis 2 then I would do this in place of other courses you mentioned. Keep in mind the core ideas in real analysis 1 are fundamental to success in real analysis 2, so if you didn't take the first part seriously you may have difficulties.

[notacolour]

If you were asking if it's helpful in the sense of helping to prepare for your grad econ courses, I'd say...not very. But, yes, it could be a good signal. Like econandon, though, I'd worry about taking the second in a difficult sequence after not putting too much into the first course. Or were you saying the only thing lazy you did was to take it pass/non-pass?

If there's much concern about doing well in it, I'd suggest probability and statistics or mathematical econ, because a C or D (or a W) in real analysis II is not such a great signal.

[needeconhelp]

I P/Nc ed Real Anaysis II~ Measure Theory.

[needeconhelp]

P/NC=pass or No Credit

[pevdoki1]

Last semester (the one that just ended) I took Real Analysis I, Mathematical Statistics I, and Abstract Algebra I. Next semester, I am taking Real Analysis II, Mathematical Statistics II, Abstract Algebra II, and an Algebra Seminar.

It feels like a waste to take the first part in the sequence without taking the second. I won't be satisfied until I see some derivatives, god damn it!

[buckykatt]

Originally Posted by pevdoki1

It feels like a waste to take the first part in the sequence without taking the second. I won't be satisfied until I see some derivatives, god damn it!

LOL! Exactly. This is point at which you finally get to develop all the cool stuff that means we can optimize suitable functions. The first piece would be like a joke without a punchline.

[macroeconomicus]

It might become helpful after the first year if you specialize in theory or econometrics.

[butler blue]

The actual material will not be helpful. I took two semesters of Rudin; the second gave me nothing that I will ever use again, unless I become a micro theorist, which I won't. However, it did continue to help me learn how to build solid arguments and write proofs. If you don't have this skill down yet, it could be worthwhile. However, your other course options are much more directly applicable.

[buckykatt]

I realized I didn't actually address the question.. If you don't have any coursework in statistics and/or probability, then I'd say that ought to be your priority--almost every program says they want to see that as a minimum, whereas analysis is more of a "good to have". Having said that, I can't imagine any adcom seriously saying "hey, this guy got an A in his second semester of analysis but he didn't take stats--reject!" So, if you truly have to choose one or the other, I'd say go with whichever one you feel you will enjoy and excel in, but lean toward stats if you have any doubt.

As for "mathematical economics", courses with that name might vary pretty widely; but if it includes lots of optimization, that sounds worthwhile both in terms of preparation and signaling.