<p>"Are you serious?"</p>
<p>Dead serious... I know it's weird, that's why it's hard for me to find other people like me.</p>
<p>No matter what Stanford scientists and engineers talk at a dinner table or at a coffee shop, they have changed the world through their milestone technology inventions, more so than any other university in the world. </p>
<p>Stanford people invented some of the greatest technologies, including microprocessor, internet TCP/IP protocol, DSL, internet multiprotocol router, digital music synthesis, digital controled robot arm, gene cloning, first working laser, transistor, sattlite TV, GPS, microwave technology, klystron (the foundation of radar), and etc. Stanford students also founded the best known companies such as HP, Google, Yahoo, and Sun.</p>
<p>datalook and geomom have a point.</p>
<p>You have a very narrow view of what constitutes an "intellectual" conversation. Take a look at this list of notable Stanford alumni. Part of the magic of Stanford is the brilliant conglomeration of many different kinds of genius! Cross-pollination of different ideas leads to amazing discoveries, ideas and inventions.</p>
<p>List</a> of Stanford University people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</p>
<p>College is a wonderful opportunity to expand your horizons--jump out of your comfort zone!</p>
<p>
[quote]
College is a wonderful opportunity to expand your horizons--jump out of your comfort zone!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>More often than not, doing great things in your very own narrow field of study is such a difficult thing to do that it's as far out of the comfort zone as one can get. </p>
<p>I think faraday's question is about his fit for the school, not about denying that there are phenomenal achievements that have come out of the school -- in response to datalook. How likely is it that he can just strike up conversation about topics of interest to fellow students, etc?</p>
<p>Stanford is a large place. There are more easygoing people, and there are less easygoing ones. Go take a look at some of the graduate students and postdocs, as well as some of the percentage of undergraduates who'll actually be very much the kind faraday seems to want to meet. I understand what he wants, and one advice I will give is that when one starts discovering, within academic fields, a narrow subsection which one would like to study further in the future, pretty soon even postdocs and graduate students won't necessarily be well versed in the material -- depending on their specialization. So, another consideration for faraday is how early he sees himself narrowing in. If he will narrow in early, choosing a school like MIT just because it is more "sciency" may not be ideal, because only a tiny fraction of the students will understand the given subfield he may be interested in ! If faraday anticipates having slightly broader interests within physics + engineering, then a school like Caltech or MIT may be a perfect fit -- i.e. plenty of students who'll be able to talk to him about what he likes to think about. </p>
<p>I'd warn that just because students at a school have gone on to do great things doesn't mean they're <em>widely</em> (as in, on average) the same "type" as faraday in attitude. That's probably what he's being careful of as he selects among schools.</p>
<p>Yeah, what mathboy says is what I was meaning. I'm not saying that Stanford people don't do great things, I'm just talking of the general attitude of undergrad students at Stanford. And no, I'm not advanced enough to be focused on the little triple bond of XYZ molecule. I'm more of a generalist, as far as my interests are concerned. And some people might say, "well you know, wherever you go, the postdocs/professors will be intellectual"= > What's the point of having a smart student body like the one at Stanford then? After all, you'll likely spend more time with fellow students than with a professor.</p>
<p>faraday, you clearly have doubts that Stanford is the right place for you. In our experience, Stanford has been the perfect combination of excellent academic opportunities, engaged, intelligent students, and human beings with a life outside of pure academia. But that does not make Stanford perfect, nor a perfect fit for everyone. You seem to desire a more "intense" experience. I actually think you'd enjoy Cal Tech.</p>
<p>My DS chose Stanford over all the Ivies (yes, he was admitted) and MIT (and I was quite surprised at his decision), but he is VERY happy. No one should have to defend their choice or their school. All colleges, even those that are not the "top" colleges, have positives and negatives, and all can be a perfect fit for many, but not all, students.</p>
<p>Wait 10 more days the answer may be very clear.</p>
<p>ewho, what do you mean?</p>
<p>And it seems many stanford people find my post offensive (in the way I'm attacking Stanford culture). If so, I sincerely apologize. I'm just an indecisive college guy trying to make a decision, based on his own characteristic, and trying to understand stanford's academic culture.</p>
<p>Since we are discussing intellectuals:</p>
<p>Pretty funny.</p>
<p>faraday! I don't think anyone found your post offensive! You asked a good question; a provocative one, and got a range of answers. I think you signaled that this is what you wanted - a discussion that explores all sides of the issue. Don't feel bad at all! I actually think everyone here is interested in your question and quite sincerely would like to help you find the right environment where you will grow and be happy.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>What's the point of having a smart student body like the one at Stanford then?<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>The point is that Stanford is a full-service university. There is a lot more to it than math and science. You can also major in things like Accounting, French, Music, and Art. And Stanford seeks to enroll the smartest students in ALL its disciplines. It's just not realistic to expect a genius in Renaissance Art or Latin Composition or Catalan Literature to have the some interest in conversations about Relativity that a physics guy does. The world simply does not work that way.</p>
<p>You'll find plenty of what you are looking for at Stanford, not only with the faculty but among undergrads too -- that is undergrads with majors and interests similar to yours. The only problem with your thinking is that you seem to expect nearly every single student to share your same passions. That's just not going to happen. Not at Stanford. Not anywhere.</p>
<p>Thanks for the answers. </p>
<p>And coureur, that's why I originally put in my thread I was interested about the techies only, because I knew that it would be rare to find both a humanities fan and relativity addict :D</p>
<p>Good discussion everyone! Yes we are all trying to help Faraday decide.</p>
<p>Maybe check out Dr. Ge Wang's amazing program at CCRMA (pronounced Karma) for an example of the type of collaborative environment I was trying to illustrate.</p>
<p>Center</a> for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics</p>
<p>Or the Science Technology and Society BA or BS degree
Or the Hopkins Marine Station
Or SLAC
Or the Individually Designed Major program.</p>
<p>It is fantastic that you are big into science and math. I'm offering that many other intellectual ideas coming from brilliant minds will inform your interests in different ways and improve your understanding of those subjects you enjoy, and if you let them, expand your horizons about who and what is valuable to you and the other people affiliated with Stanford. (Or any other of life's adventures!)</p>
<p>I now comprehend that I had a hard time wording what I was looking for in an undergrad experience. So I looked up the Internet and found a blog by Yan. Z., one of the MIT bloggers. Her paragraph is basically a summary of all the academic aspects I yearn for in my college experience. And here is what she wrote:</p>
<p>"This past semester, I've finally started to understand MIT as an institute built on cooperative, immersive learning. Meaning that the curriculum is structured around a level of difficulty that requires you to reach out and work with your classmates, to stay up until the early hours of the morning discussing problem sets, correcting each other, plowing yourselves into deeper, subtler levels of comprehension that you certainly didn't see during lecture. The end effect is that the line between your classes and life beyond classes becomes progressively blurrier **until you're instinctively radiating and **absorbing information from those around you during all waking hours. This is unbelievably uplifting to your ability to make interesting dinner conversation at family gatherings. "</p>
<p>I have purposefully bolded words that are important to me. Some people may say, if MIT has everything I'm looking for, then why am I still indecisive? Well, here is the deal. MIT has every academic characteristics I'm looking for. In fact, I was not even considering Stanford as a top choice, until I got in. MIT has always been what people call "dream school". However, getting in to Stanford made me reflect upon its differences with MIT, and the more I think about it, the more the academic qualities of MIT and Stanford blur into each other. And if Stanford has also the academics/student body I'm looking for **plus the awesome weather and pretty campus<a href="guys,%20this%20is%20my%20opinion,%20so%20bear%20with%20me">/B</a> that MIT lacks, why not Stanford?</p>
<p>@ Fillifurel, what you posted is definitely of interest to me, as both music and physics fan :D</p>
<p>PS: I know my concerns my irritate others who don't have the immense fortune and luck to have my dilemma. I am very grateful to have such a choice, and in no way to I try to irritate those who were rejected/deferred. Neither do I believe I am more deserving than any of you guys out there.</p>
<p>faraday, what I meant was by April 1 you will for sure know which schools you get in (hopefully nobody puts you on the waitlist), and you might have a clear idea to decide where to go.</p>
<p>About the Yan Z post, I would not read too much into her blogs. If she were that busy in her study, her blog whould have been just two or three lines.</p>
<p>If a new creature is in the hands of Harvard, MIT and Stanford, Harvard would create a theory to say where it came from; MIT would do the analysis on its structure; and Stanford would find a way to make money out of it, .... and I would just eat it. :-)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I'd add that the graduate students will be similarly intellectual, and they're a great pleasure to talk to. </p>
<p>Either way, I see that you are fairly confident you will not narrow into something very quickly. I grew to be very finicky, very early, about what I wanted to study. For instance, while I used to read physics for fun when I was exactly at your stage of decision-making, I rapidly realized that there was not a moment I'd really rather be reading something other than pure math, and that too, of a certain variety. If you consider very strongly the likelihood of your changing, then I'd encourage you to more greatly consider this "scienciness" factor of schools -- MIT and Caltech both come to mind as great choices. </p>
<p>I think I can spell out that the main difference between Stanford and MIT to you will be that at Stanford, you may have to form your own gathering of students with similar interests to yourself to work with (even based on my experience at my own similar school), whereas you may find it just more widespread at a purely technical school for students to be talking about what you are. Again, assuming you do not grow finicky early on.</p>
<p>Anecdotally, I was once considering schools like Harvey Mudd and Caltech, but realized that I didn't value "intensity" as much as I thought I did. The only school I realized that I'd consider braving the cold for in undergrad is Harvard, to which I did not apply back in the day. Your question amounts basically to choosing between a mixture of student types, and an overall more intensely technical student body -- Stanford simply cannot have an identical student body to MIT's, because they are fundamentally different schools. But yes, it has great weather, and will certainly have several students like you, whom you'll naturally run into if you take a very hard physics course. What it all seems to come down to is I think the "Stanford student" can be a huge number of things, and it depends if you like your fellow students to uniformly be a body of people at least somewhat like you (though I guarantee not everyone at MIT will be the same either!).</p>
<p>
[quote]
And if Stanford has also the academics/student body I'm looking for plus the awesome weather and pretty campus (guys, this is my opinion, so bear with me) that MIT lacks, why not Stanford?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>A few of my good friends at the school would look at you strangely, just as they used to look at me in high school, when I'd randomly start talking about math. :) </p>
<p>But I think this makes clear what I mean -- it depends if you like the idea of a culture of intensity. Which begs the question -- did you apply to schools like Caltech or Harvey Mudd! It would not be clear to me from your description of yourself why you'd choose MIT or Stanford over these two!</p>
<p>ewho, faraday has been admitted to both schools.</p>
<p>"Caltech or Harvey Mudd"</p>
<p>Well, I got into Caltech, but it's just way too small for me. I applied to harvey mudd, but dropped my application... b/c I thought it was too liberal artsy :D</p>
<p>Faraday, I highly recommend that you put off making a decision until after you have gone to Admit Weekend at Stanford and CPW at MIT. While those weekends are to a certain extent a dog and pony show for the university, they will still give you a sense of who your classmates will be and what life will be like on campus. You can't go wrong at either university, so attend those weekends and then go with your gut reaction.</p>