Jump to content
Urch Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined


  • My Tests

Spectrum's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. I won't go into my personal story as to why I'm even asking this question (which I never thought that I would ever ask). Some industry jobs seem very interesting, others seem awful (i.e consulting, Amazon, Zibbit). This prompts me to ask two questions: 1) Is it possible to target only interesting industry jobs that you are a "good fit" for and expect to get one of them? 2) For going into industry is there any advice which differs from the typical advice with regards to choosing a PhD program? I'm only talking about jobs which require a PhD.
  2. If OP is interested in micro theory then he should notice that Umass has no theorists in the department (as far as I can see from a brief look). The analogy of homeopathy:medicine to heterodox:mainstream econ is what I had a problem with. You seem to have made this analogy without intending all its implications, which is understandable. Nonetheless, it is a bad analogy. I can't recommend for or against doing heterodox econ, but I can certainly argue over misconceptions of mainstream econ (parts of it at least, that I have been studying), and this analogy tripped a wire. To be fair, Jean Triole and Dani Rodrik also have tripped this wire, so you may think of me as being extremely arrogant myself - but I am confident in what I've said.
  3. This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I have ever read on here. I'd explain to you why, but it's entirely hopeless because you most probably lack the background in natural science and philosophy to realize even what you yourself just said. Here's a tip: don't make sweeping claims about disciplines you know nothing about. Not trying to be rude, but the arrogance in this post is too overwhelming to be ignored.
  4. Personally I feel like my analysis skills are way overkill (at least for consumer theory). But I also feel so far that it is helpful to know what limit points are, what a continuous function is, etc. - undergrad at a school that isn't top20; I wouldn't be surprised if the material is a lot more difficult at higher ranked schools.
  5. I am interested in micro theory (I know that it is harder to get a job in this field), but typically I feel departments outside the top 10 will not place well if you are a theorist. Thus the department, which wants to place as well as possible, will be hesitant to admit a student who expresses a particular interest in theory if the department is lower ranked (outside the top 20 for instance). Do you guys think that this kind of reasoning enters the minds of adcoms? If so, is it better to not mention theory interests? What if your letters may mention this? On the other hand, perhaps these schools are less likely to get theory students, and have theory faculty that may wish that there were more in the program.
  6. I think you're wrong Double Jump, but tutonic will have to confirm this. As he's European, I'm guessing what we assumed was a basic intro to proofs class is actually a relatively rigorous first semester of real analysis with 2 chapters of group theory (or something like this). The Further Calculus class is a second semester of analysis, and the fourth class is a more rigorous edition of a first semester in real analysis (most likely with baby Rudin, I'm guessing?) intending to prepare students to excel in graduate math courses.
  7. As usual, I have no clue about what you should do for PhD admissions. However, that Further Calculus class looks odd to me. I'm guessing it's not proof based given the courses that come after it, but it seems like in that case it's a regular calculus course. If you've already taken the standard calculus series then I'd look into this course a little more. Laplace Transforms are covered in differential equations courses but not the other topics usually, in the US. Your real analysis class looks like it covers the standard topics, although it could be said to be missing reimman integration (although this is not to say the class looks less rigorous at all - we can't tell the level of rigor from what you've posted, so don't take what I just said as the class being inferior to that which most people on this forum take)
  8. Advanced Calculus in the US always means Real Analysis. Since Real analysis covers the basically same topics more or less as the calculus sequence, make sure that you're talking about a class focused on solving integrals/derivatives rather than a class focused on using limits and properties of functions and metric spaces. By the way, are you interested in academic political economy? Perhaps that is something to look into, if what you meant by the economics of policy making is the economics of implementing policy (i.e. stakeholders etc).
  9. I agree that we should prefer not to give awards to the same person twice in a row. Unfortunately Chateauheart has been too helpful and will have to accept the award anyway. I vote for him. This isn't to downplay all the other helpful people on the forum, it's just that Chateauheart is simply *that* nice.
  10. I think Colorado and UCSB are known to place a lot better (read: more towards academia) than their ranking suggests. You asked about outliers, so there are two. I also think Cornell is known to place noticeably worse than similarly ranked programs. This is just from reading threads on here, really.
  11. There have been posts on this forum to the effect of saying that Columbia's masters programs are just money-makers for unknowing Chinese students who see "Columbia" and press buy. If I am remembering this correctly, then it is the case that Columbia comes out with a new masters degree every few years. I could be wrong, but in case none of the elders of the forum come to this thread, I wanted to throw this out there.
  12. Nevermind. I just checked your profile thread. Just so you know, your courses are for a flexible masters degree in Statistics - not a masters in Mathematics. Good luck though! I never understood why PhD programs want differential equations, since it's just an extended calculus course with a ton of number crunching, but what do I know...
  13. Could you elaborate on how easy/hard it is to move to Europe after getting a US PhD? I mean if you graduate from a top 10 I imagine it is very easy, but what about everyone else? I'm talking about academic jobs, here. I assumed that European universities wouldn't be very ready to take a flier on an American who has never lived in Europe and has no family in Europe, even if they came well recommended from a good school.
  14. Seriously? This test isn't free you know. I am better at math than most but if I get 1 question wrong, dropping me to 168, I get filtered out based on my math qualifications?! I cant believe that admissions committees who know what a hypothesis test is could fall for this stunt..
  15. Can you get a PhD from CEMFI without speaking Spanish? It looks like the PhD is at least partially taught in Spanish. CEMFI masters looks good though, of course.
  • Create New...