<p>Yes, like they've scientifically proven a direct relationship between the angle of Mars to Neptune (varying with the season, of course) and the likelihood of meeting Beyonce at the hot-dog stand of your local high school football stadium.</p>
<p>It's true!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don't be sarcastic. They measure success by the popular Success Quotient (SQ), which is given by:</p>
<p>SQ = 10^100 * US + 1/m^100</p>
<p>Where US = US News ranking of undergraduate institution attended and m = total money earned in lifetime.</p>
<p>Wow, so the key to being successful, besides earning a lot of money, is to go to the absolute worst ranked university possible. :)</p>
<p>Given that m is a denominator, then it would seem wise to earn an amount in the interval (0, 1) to maximize Success Quotient. Hence, we should all become lowlives.</p>
<p>I shall inform my lazy no-good sophomore brother of this :D</p>
<p>Wow, you're absolutely correct.</p>
<p>My brother says "Shweet." He plans to remain a leech for the rest of his material existence.</p>
<p>Tkm--m is actually measured in yen, making 0 < m < 1 very difficult. Sorry.</p>
<p>Why is yen the standard? We should be using Euros. They're stronger than either US or Japanese currency.</p>
<p>The yen is the standard because it's prettttty difficult to have a total life earning of 1 yen :p</p>
<p>I think we should use some obscure currency, like gold yuan or something.</p>
<p>hehe ;)</p>
<p>Engineers vs Executives</p>
<p>Theorem:
Engineers and scientists will never make as much money as business executives.</p>
<p>Proof:
Postulate 1: Knowledge is Power.
Postulate 2: Time is Money.</p>
<p>As every engineer knows,
Work
---------- = Power
Time</p>
<p>Since Knowledge = Power, and Time = Money, we have:
Work
----------- = Knowledge
Money</p>
<p>Solving for Money, we get:
Work
------------------ = Money
Knowledge</p>
<p>Thus, as Knowledge approaches zero, Money approaches infinity regardless of the Work done.</p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>The Less you Know, the More you Make.</p>
<p>Note: It has been speculated that the reason why Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard's math program was because he stumbled upon this proof as an undergraduate, and dedicated the rest of his career to the pursuit of ignorance.</p>
<p>on a serious note, though. Pleas don't generalize too much. It's kinda offensive. ;)</p>
<p>I have a real-life example to prove this theorem: my mother has a PhD in English. She earns $7.50 an hour at JC Penny, selling glasses to people with many times the income of ours who don't understand a word she says. It's pretty funny.</p>
<p>I never said that there wasn't a relationship between your school and your success.</p>
<p>People who go to high-class schools probably are more successful because they were smart enough to get into them in the first place and possibly because of the better education.</p>
<p>But regardless, going to a worse school is NOT going to make you less successful if you have the right ambition.</p>
<p>There may be something in this link that OP could find useful in re post #1.</p>
<p>Ok, let's not be mean here. This is a kid asking for some advice to go to college. So here's my advice to the freshman:</p>
<p>Go ahead and try to accomplish all those academic things on your list. Don't listen to these people. Even if you don't accomplish EVERY SINGLE thing on the list, putting forth your best effort is really important.
A college admissions officer will quickly group applications--you would come under the grouping Academic Star. But for Harvard, you really have to prove that you have Straight A's, Heavy AP Load (10-12 should do it), and PROOF OF INTELLECTUAL NATURE. Do something intellectual!! All the things on there are really great, but get involved in 1 or 2 (max) intellectual activities. Organize an assembly at your school about an intellectual topic. That's one idea. Write a research paper that gets published or is really good. Do something unique that shows your intellectual interests. I'm telling you, this is what they are looking for. A former Ivy League admissions officer told me this. So numbers aside, are you going to prove this?</p>