Jump to content
Urch Forums

greglowry

Members
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

Converted

  • My Tests
    No

greglowry's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

1

Reputation

  1. Seems it just expands on RA1. Stuff like fractals are included, as are more in-depth investigations of what we had done. More detail about things like Fourier series that weren't touched upon with significant depth in my class.
  2. My current math courses (not including econometrics of any sort): Calc I (A) Calc II (A) Calc III (A+) Linear Algebra (full year sequence) (A+) Calc I-II prerequisite standard intro statistics course (A+) Mathematical Probability Theory I with Calc III prerequisite (A-) Mathematical Probability Theory II with Real Analysis I prerequisite (A) Real Analysis I (A-) Differential Equations (A+) Game theory (under math faculty at my school) (A+) Next year I would take courses like time series analysis instead of RA2. I'd rather take time series analysis, and I'd rather be applied as opposed to theoretical. But my concern is just for the programs I'm applying to. Would they prefer RA2? They are all Master's programs.
  3. I'm entering my final year of undergraduate studies - looking to go to a good school for a Master's program (like LSE's MSc in Econ or MSc in Econometrics and Mathematical Economics). I have a lot of econ and a lot of math, but the 'pure, proof-based math' I have really is only a few courses in probability theory and the standard Rudin RA. I received an A- in the latter which sounds bad by American standards, although in my country there is lower grade inflation (that A- represents the top 10-15% of my class - about a third of the class failed). In my final year, I have a choice between either Real Analysis II or some more applied statistics/econometrics classes that I find really interesting. I'd prefer to take the latter, but I'd like to ask - given my background and graduate admissions aspirations, would it be necessary/helpful for me to take RA II? I'm just concerned I don't have enough pure hard math but I don't know if it's really as necessary given that I both already have a decent mark in my transcript for RA I and I am not applying for a PhD program. Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
  4. I'm entering my final year of undergraduate studies - looking to go to a good school for a Master's program (like LSE's MSc in Econ or MSc in Econometrics and Mathematical Economics). I have a lot of econ and a lot of math, but the 'pure, proof-based math' I have really is only a few courses in probability theory and the standard Rudin RA. I received an A- in the latter which sounds bad by American standards, although in my country there is lower grade inflation (that A- represents the top 10-15% of my class - about a third of the class failed). In my final year, I have a choice between either Real Analysis II or some more applied statistics/econometrics classes that I find really interesting. I'd prefer to take the latter, but I'd like to ask - given my background and graduate admissions aspirations, would it be necessary/helpful for me to take RA II? I'm just concerned I don't have enough pure hard math but I don't know if it's really as necessary given that I both already have a decent mark in my transcript for RA I and I am not applying for a PhD program. Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
×
×
  • Create New...