<p>In short, is it worth taking these classes if I am not a math/physics major? How about if I am a math/physics major? Do recruiters care?</p>
<p>in order of your questions:</p>
<p>no, it'll save you time later which you could spend on electives (or not), and probably not.</p>
<p>other people could probably answer the last question better but you're not going to put "honors math/etc" on a resume. so unless you hand them a transcript, dont think it counts much. i think it's better to get the A in the lower level than the B in the higher.</p>
<p>edit: denz or shraf or someone has said it before - this isn't high school where taking the most challenging classes is always a good thing.</p>
<p>Those are not classes to take to pad your resume.</p>
<p>S took honors math. It's 4.5 units (a course and a half) and a lot of work. Its main advantage is for those thinking about majoring in math, because it is an immediate introduction to proof-based courses. </p>
<p>The accelerated physics has a reputation for requiring true devotion. Again, it is intended for those who think they will be physics majors and who also have a really good background in physics. It's the kind of class that will be the academic focus of your semester. If you're thinking of majoring in physics the 1600 sequence works fine.</p>
<p>I made a long reply to DaTurtle over PM, by his request. If he likes, he's welcome to post it here.</p>
<p>One thing I would add to what I wrote there, however, is that the 3rd-semester course in the 1600 physics sequence, phys 2601 quantum mechanics, is easily the hardest course I took while at columbia. It's not that different from 2800, just less broad. Beware the quantum mechanics, oh ye who aren't thinking about majoring in physics (As I was). The rest of you only need 2 semesters.</p>
<p>Thank you everyone, you've been incredibly helpful. I will post Denzera's PM, in case someone might have the same question in the future. </p>
<p>
<p>Re: Class choices No, the sad truth is that recruiters and financial services firms don't care what classes you took, they care that you got A's. they want to be able to say you graduated cum laude from Hot Sheit University on your blurb to clients. That's it.</p>
<p>Physics 2800 is just way too hard. The top, absolute smartest students in SEAS will all take that class, which is great if you want to meet smart people but bad if you're getting curved against them - even if you're pretty smart yourself. Being average is pretty respectable there but if it gets you a B+, nobody's happy.</p>
<p>Honors math is at least a little different. It's more proofs, and less traditional calculus curriculum. They go into more interesting areas of mathematics, and if you legitimately enjoy math (as I do), it'd be a good choice. When I was in SEAS, though, only CC kids were allowed to take the Honors track, so I cant' speak to exactly how it'll go down.</p>
<p>Where I would push yourself, if you would have my advice, is in Chemistry. Intensive G-chem is, indeed, a little bit harder than regular G-Chem. But:</p>
<p>1) It's one semester instead of two. you're done with your requirement after one semester, and can do whatever you like in the spring.</p>
<p>2) The professor is better, and absolutely loves his students. George Flynn is still teaching it, right? If he is, he takes a ridiculous amount of his own time doing office hours and explaining things 2 and 3 times.</p>
<p>3) The class is a lot smaller and you get more out of the lectures. Plus he posts the slides online as Powerpoint decks.</p>
<p>4) You don't have to do a retarded research-paper project, it's just 3 tests and a final, plus weekly psets.</p>
<p>5) It's more credits, and the curve is better than G-Chem.</p>
<p>6) Did I mention it's only one semester?</p>
<p>My two cents.
</p>
<p>Denzera,</p>
<p>S took 2601 and was just talking about it when he was home over break. The prof (not the one you had, I don't think) saw the abysmal performance on the first midterm and apologized to the class for the poor job he was doing teaching it! We were talking about how classy that was. Luckily, there was a fantastic TA who really got the students through the material.</p>
<p>The problem, as I understand it, was that it requires a lot more math than most CC kids, anyway, have had at that point. Later, when my S took ODE in the math department and breezed through it, he realized he had already had to teach most of it to himself during that semester of 2601 in order to understand the physics. So, maybe it wouldn't be an impossible class if someone had ODE before going in.</p>
<p>Do you know anything about Brian Greene's math of quantum mechanics class, which he's teaching in the math department? How about mathematics of physics, being taught by some Russian in the physics department?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Where I would push yourself, if you would have my advice, is in Chemistry. Intensive G-chem is, indeed, a little bit harder than regular G-Chem.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
4) You don't have to do a retarded research-paper project, it's just 3 tests and a final, plus weekly psets.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>what research paper project??? that doesn't exist in gchem....gchem also has multiple choice exams while intensive has written answer exams....as a result i think gchem is significantly easier than intensive. </p>
<p>but yes, the one semester thing is a big advantage...but again, its not worth sacrificing a good grade for.</p>
<p>otherwise i second the rest of denzera's advice</p>
<p>Well, I'm in both right now and I have to say that they seem like they're going to suck a huge amount of time out of me every single week. I find the material itself fairly interesting, but as an undecided I'm not entirely how wise a decision it was to take both courses as far as recruiting/gpa performance goes.</p>
<p>
[quote]
what research paper project??? that doesn't exist in gchem
[/quote]
</p>
<p>last year it was either flynn or turro's class that had to write a 1 or 2 page paper about some chemist and describe their contribution to the science or something.... i think it's a regular thing for turro maybe</p>
<p>So I was just wondering if, for the sake of argument, I wanted to pursue a PhD in math or physics from some TOP place, like MIT or Caltech. Would those programs really care about 2800 and hon. math? I mean, not everyone has had a lot of math & physics in high school, and they can't really penalize me for starting off at the intermediate level, can they?</p>
<p>
[quote]
So I was just wondering if, for the sake of argument, I wanted to pursue a PhD in math or physics from some TOP place, like MIT or Caltech. Would those programs really care about 2800 and hon. math? I mean, not everyone has had a lot of math & physics in high school, and they can't really penalize me for starting off at the intermediate level, can they?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>no, it wouldnt exactly hurt you. the only advantage would be that you would have more time in later years where you could fit in higher levels of physics/math/whatever. those higher levels, if you can get good grades in them, i would think would put you a step ahead of other people applying...</p>
<p>but again, it's all about balancing grades with class levels.</p>
<p>sac,</p>
<p>I had Cole as my professor for 2601. It hurt like the fire of a thousand suns.
[quote]
The problem, as I understand it, was that it requires a lot more math than most CC kids, anyway, have had at that point. Later, when my S took ODE in the math department and breezed through it, he realized he had already had to teach most of it to himself during that semester of 2601 in order to understand the physics. So, maybe it wouldn't be an impossible class if someone had ODE before going in.
[/quote]
that is exactly what happened to me. I had a lot of catch-up to do on the math.</p>
<p>It wasn't just ODE - which I had had some exposure to - it was a lot of Fourier Series, which i'd never seen. And matrix operations, eigenvectors and such, which would be OK if you've taken linear algebra before (and I had, in high school), but even that was stretching it. The real problem is the lack of a textbook. If your son had a textbook, A) that's an improvement, and B) i hate him. :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
It wasn't just ODE - which I had had some exposure to - it was a lot of Fourier Series, which i'd never seen. And matrix operations, eigenvectors and such, which would be OK if you've taken linear algebra before (and I had, in high school), but even that was stretching it. The real problem is the lack of a textbook. If your son had a textbook, A) that's an improvement, and B) i hate him.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>:) S also had linear algebra in high school (at a community college). I think there was a textbook for 2601, but I don't think he found it particularly helpful. They did have a fantastic TA. In fact, the prof told the class that, although he knew he wasn't doing a great job teaching the course, he had done them the favor of picking the best TA in the department. On the other hand, my S also had mono during his finals that semester... It all evens out. </p>
<p>*</p>