Jayd Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 I know in order to impress the adcoms, we have to take real analysis and get an A. However, my school doesn't have undergraduate real analysis class. Should I just take graduate real analysis? I am worried that I might get a bad grade because math in graduate level is much harder to undergrad math. Also I am wondering why we have to take real analysis? One of my econ professors told me that real analysis is not that helpful unless my interest is about theoretical economics. Any thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watch Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 post the course description I will tell you if it is actually graduate level course or not If it is you can not take it - you will definitely fail it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
startz Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 Real analysis is often used in first year courses. In addition, it is often the first serious proof-based course that is taken in American colleges. Being able to do proofs is important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayd Posted December 24, 2016 Author Share Posted December 24, 2016 In my college we have discrete mathematics as the first partial proof-based class and analysis as the first full proof-based course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayd Posted December 24, 2016 Author Share Posted December 24, 2016 In my college we have discrete mathematics as the first partial proof-based class and analysis as the first full proof-based course.post the course description I will tell you if it is actually graduate level course or not If it is you can not take it - you will definitely fail it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayd Posted December 24, 2016 Author Share Posted December 24, 2016 Course discription: Develops the theory of Lebesgue measure and the Lebesgue integral on the line, emphasizing the various notions of convergence and the standard convergence theorems. Applications are made to the classical Lp spaces In my college we have discrete mathematics as the first partial proof-based class and analysis as the first full proof-based course. For undergrads there are two proof-based classes called analysis 1 and 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayd Posted December 24, 2016 Author Share Posted December 24, 2016 Course description: Develops the theory of Lebesgue measure and the Lebesgue integral on the line, emphasizing the various notions of convergence and the standard convergence theorems. Applications are made to the classical Lp spaces In my college we have discrete mathematics as the first partial proof-based class and analysis as the first full proof-based course. For undergrads there are two proof-based classes called analysis 1 and 2. In order to take real analysis, we have to take analysis 1 and 2 as prerequisite.post the course description I will tell you if it is actually graduate level course or not If it is you can not take it - you will definitely fail it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apatheix Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 Course discription: Develops the theory of Lebesgue measure and the Lebesgue integral on the line, emphasizing the various notions of convergence and the standard convergence theorems. Applications are made to the classical Lp spaces In my college we have discrete mathematics as the first partial proof-based class and analysis as the first full proof-based course. For undergrads there are two proof-based classes called analysis 1 and 2. It sounds like your course is attempting to cover the first 3 chapters of big rudin or atleast a watered down version of it. I'd be surprised if you could follow such a class without knowing any prior analysis or some basic point set topology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjyNel Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 The Analysis I & II for undergrads are exactly what ECON people mean by "real analysis". They are helpful for developing your skills of writing proofs and also teach you knowledge that might be useful when you learn more advanced Econ. For now, forget about the graduate level real analysis. They are super difficult and not required for applications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayd Posted December 25, 2016 Author Share Posted December 25, 2016 And in order to take this course, I will have to take 2 proof-based undergrad courses. So I think I will not over commit here.It sounds like your course is attempting to cover the first 3 chapters of big rudin or atleast a watered down version of it. I'd be surprised if you could follow such a class without knowing any prior analysis or some basic point set topology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayd Posted December 25, 2016 Author Share Posted December 25, 2016 Thanks for the reply. Now I am more relaxed and don't have to worry about real analysis. I did get an A in Analysis I this semester, so I am doing fine. The Analysis I & II for undergrads are exactly what ECON people mean by "real analysis". They are helpful for developing your skills of writing proofs and also teach you knowledge that might be useful when you learn more advanced Econ. For now, forget about the graduate level real analysis. They are super difficult and not required for applications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.