<p>"patented 4 chemical formulas in chemistry"</p>
<p>I think he's right. Noone actually patented aspirin...or acetone or anything. So...that basically ends the discussion completely.</p>
<p>on the topic of patenting formulas, perhaps they also mean preparation techniques and stuff. I imagine each one would have to be pretty complex/multistepped if they were commercially important. And it seems taht you would have to be able to patent formulas; how would Coca-cola patent the particular rxns? i'm guessing taht's sort of what they mean. </p>
<p>oh, i'm a 1600, but i'm counting on a lot of rejections from schools that aren't even considered all that hard to get into. but i have crappy grades too, lol. actually, anybody know some good schools that put a decently big emphasis on standardized test scores as opposed to GPA? sry, i don't mean to hijack the thread, but if somebody feels like answering.</p>
<p>I had a 1540 and a pretty low GPA (B/B-ish with two Cs in AP classes) and I was just accepted ED to NYU. I focused on my essay, short answers, and recommendations, and somehow managed to get in.</p>
<p>qqa, try ucla</p>
<p>"Patented" formulas will get you in if they are notable.</p>
<p>If I was the Intel winner, had 4.0 GPA, 1600sat's, I wouldn't have to do anything else. I could just say that.</p>
<p>If the Ivies didn't turn good people down they wouldn't be so elite. They also want people who bring diversity to the table. Some guy with a 1600 and some chemicals he made doesn't scream I am an interesting guy as much as someone with a 1450, plays sports, works his butt off at a job, has astronomy as a hobby, and speaks three languages, all while keeping a 4.0. Maybe I am wrong, but if the guy goes to some top-notch school that he has access to chemical research (a lot of private schools allow or even require students to do research) and he does nothing else, how is he interesting.</p>
<p>good point.
essays are everything!!!!!!</p>
<p>You still can't patent chemical formulas, I don't know why this discussion is still going. But yep, it's all about diversity.</p>
<p>How do you patent chemical formulas? Can i patent my fart smell?</p>
<p>i knew someone last year wiht 1550 sat and just such a genius...he focused on ecs he liked most and must have had amazing reccs...he got deferred and then rejected from mit because of low gpa...</p>
<p>...im sorry ive no idea what that had to do with the post...</p>
<p>I don't think it's that schools are asking too much, I think it's that their flooded with apps and need to distinguish one person from the next to fit into their meager freshman class of 1000. Maybe if every college just doubled their enrollments and doubled their acceptance rates, then every exceptional student could make it in.</p>
<p>cmon, pharmeceuticals have to be patent-able. </p>
<p>it's true that it helps to be 'well-rounded' and interesting. but if somebody is themselves and is happy with their singular dedication to academics, then i don't see how they are valid targets for people to insult.
I see a lot of people making themselves into well-rounded perfect little college applicants. the reason colleges wanted well rounded in the first place was to allow for more genuine real-lifeish applicants, not stylized machines. when people structure their lives full of activities to be more well-rounded, then how are they more genuine than a person that actually found something they care about. they're not, they're often just the next sort of stylized robot. instead of being super-academic, the new kind is interested and involved in everything.
I'm not saying all well rounded people are like that, but some of you assume that all well-rounded people are interesting and all focused strictly academic people are boring. i've found the opposite true a great deal of the time. and it'd be nice if college admissions officers would remember that college is not a freakshow, it's an academic institution.
they should remember when people have to overcome things in their lives (like having to work full time to make ends meet or something like that) but an applicant's 'interestingness' <strong>in itself</strong> shouldn't come before how much of an academic success they are. At least, it shouldn't make or break the deal. lol too bad I don't call the shots... and by my above mentioned standards, i don't really deserve to go to a lot of schools thaht I'm applying to, but maybe it's the truth.</p>
<p>not only this but if patenting the gosh dang formulas or wutever if they cant really "patent" were equal to being a sports star idk anyone who wouldnt rather spend their time inside than in the good ol fresh air</p>
<p>Just a word about the SAT. The SAT says nothing at all about a person's personality. There are people with 1600's who get f<strong><em>ed up all the time. It is a test of academic ability, and a good one at that. And a word about UPenn. Their problem is that they do an extremely *</em></strong>*ty job with admissions. That they rejected that person with the 4000 and deferred me with 1600/800 Writing/790/780, 35 ACT, 6 5's on APs and a legacy speaks volumes about their admissions office. They are extremely biased. Basically, Penn could be a top flight university if they would focus on academics in their admissions. But they don't, and they are going to get an extremely nasty letter from me when/if I am admitted to a better school.</p>
<p>lol, bitterness is never good... mellow out</p>
<p>btw I knew a person who was valedictorian, 5.0 gpa, 1600/800/800/800 who was flat out rejected from Hahvahd</p>
<p>forget about patenting formulas, how about you cure some diseases....cancer...diabetes....heart disease....anything....throw me a freakin bone here..</p>
<p>seroiusly u guys make up alot of crap on these boards</p>
<p>YEA I KNEW A 6.0, 1600/800/800/800/800/800 WITH 20 AP'S AND AFRICAN AMERICAN STATUS AND 4 TIME LEGACY AND HE INVENTED THE ATOMIC BOMB BUT HE GOT REJECTED FROM HARVARD.</p>
<p>lol, i could sit on my ass and get rejected from harvard...i'm proud..</p>
<p>lol duke it was actually 24 and one half APs</p>
<p>my fathers a chemist and he invents new chemicals daily, by the hundreds. Patenting a drug is much more of a feat. It takes thousands of new chemicals to develop a worthy drug. If you had the time and more importantly the resources you could make new chemicals all day long.</p>