<p>I am currently a sophomore and I was planning on attempting to be a Nobel Laureate or Fields Medalist next year. I will be taking the corresponding AP classes, college classes, as well as doing independent research. However, I am undecided on what to do. </p>
<p>I have several questions:
1. Does the Nobel Prize require labs?
2. Does the Fields Medal involve much mathematics?
3. Which is less competitive (relatively of course)
4. Which is easier to do independent research for?
- I will be the only person attempting to qualify for either from my school so most of the research I will have to do myself</p>
<p>I know that I had way more questions when I created this thread but I am blanking at the moment.... Also, any stories of experience in either would be helpful.</p>
<p>If you have even a strand of thought on how to solve the Millennium Prize questions, then you’re on your way to a Fields Medal.</p>
<p>You’re seriously underestimating the Nobel Prize and the Fields Medal. A lot of great minds have contributed major ideas without winning any of those two awards.</p>
<p>I suppose I wasn’t thinking when I posted this. I’m not implying that I think that I will easily get the prize or that either is “easy”. I had just wanted to attempt to get one, if only in the area. I have done similiar (if not as widely known) competitions in the past and I am amazed how much I gain from competing/attempting to compete. I was just wondering which one I would stand a better chance. </p>
<p>So thank you for answering my questions, it was quite helpful - especially the math involved in the Fields Medal. Except what are research for the Nobel Prize?</p>
<p>The Nobel Prize (in Physics, at least) has to be something that has a practical use (and of course groundbreaking). So you’re going to need insight and imagination as Nikola Tesla did.</p>
<p>Wow everyone has been so helpful! Thanks! Here are a few excerpts from my pro/con list for this:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I have an amazing chem teacher, and prbly have a little more experience with chem than bio. Plus our chem teacher is pretty intense so it would be better to take AP chem my junior year than senior year due to coursework load</p></li>
<li><p>However, I feel that I would enjoy the Nobel Prize more and I have a better chance at qualifying with the Nobel Prize bc (at least from what I’ve read) bio is more “laboratory” and “hands-on”. Although I actually prefer conceptual thinking, in past competitions I have consistently performed better in “lab” subjects because (despite the negative connotations of this learning) I find that there are a lot of intelligent people in the world but with this type of learning you are able to set yourself apart with how hard you work *</p></li>
</ol>
<p>And thanks again to everyone who has already posted!! Very helpful!!*</p>
<p>Although I still do have a few questions:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>If I were not in the top 1 who qualified for the Nobel/Fields Medal in my subject would all my studying be for naught (disregarding the valuable experience, enrichment in subject etc.) are there other “levels”</p></li>
<li><p>Nobel Prize research…any more info?*</p></li>
<li><p>Could anyone who has qualified for/attempting to qualify share some of your experiences, particularly with prep. Apart from doing research (at a prestigious university if I do the Nobel Prize…got it ) what else did you do to prepare? Starting this summer is Early enough correct if I want it by next year?</p></li>
<li><p>Dates!!! Does anyone know when these awards (Esp the awards) happen?</p></li>
<li><p>Any more info on math? I’m not exactly a math person but I’d prbly take a college math course if one was necessary for the Fields Medal</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Thanks in advance! This is by far the most helpful thread I’ve read/created!! *</p>
<p>Remember not to try and win a Nobel Prize/Fields Medal merely to impress admissions officers, you should be involved in such a task because you truly love it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, if colleges wanted to, they could just fill the class with Fields medalists and Nobel laureates; you have to show passion and write appealing essays.</p>
<p>…whatever. I actually thought the OP was being serious.</p>
<p>One more question. Nobel Prize…mainly science or history/art subjects?</p>
<p>I’m sorry to burst your bubble, but a Fields Medal/Nobel Prize is not enough to guarantee admissions by a long shot in this millennium. There has been a weird misconception around CC lately regarding this.</p>
<p>Remember, there are literally thousands of galaxies where such prizes are awarded. You need a hook to really set yourself apart, perhaps a universal award of some sort, to make a significant difference in your admissions chance.</p>
<p>What species are you? You may gain a boost if you’re not a eukaryote.</p>
<p>Affirmative action for prokaryotes is so unfair.</p>
<p>Thanks Vaeliant!! Good luck to you in your admissions! </p>
<p>Does anyone have anymore info esp on the Nobel Prize? After considering it, I think I may be leaning towards the Nobel Prize. Esp considering the Fields Medal mathematics not necessarily one of my strengths</p>
<p>I suggest you devise a complete cure for acne (as in, entirely wiping out the unfortunate disease from our gene pool) in your quest for the Nobel Prize. And if you want more information on the Nobel Prize, I suggest you peruse Wikipedia. It is a much esteemed research site.</p>
<p>@ Jersey13. I completely agree. Ugh. They were evolutionarily disadvantaged like 9 millenia ago, but have the same adaptations as we do now. =/.</p>
<p>and @Ilikeyou</p>
<p>I would still recommend shooting above planetary awards. Perhaps you should go for the Rings medal. There’s an internship in Andromeda that churns out several winners each year. It’s called ISR (Intergalaxy Scientists and Researchers).</p>
<p>^ You don’t know much about prokaryotes, do you? They’re still heavily socioeconomically disadvantaged compared to eukaryotes. Do you know that they have an average of zero organelles? There are so many Foraminiferan kids with exactly the same high stats, and in a holistic admissions process they don’t really stand out. </p>
<p>The Nobel Prize is still pretty good, because basically no one gets the interplanetary or interstellar awards. Go for the Literature prize because it’s the easiest. The economics prize isn’t really a Nobel Prize at all.</p>
<p>^No, literature is a crapshoot, unless you’re fascist, in which case you have no chance anyway.</p>
<p>Go for a Nobel Peace Prize, the committee will give them to practically anyone these days…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s not true. I have some thoughts on how one might prove Goldbach’s conjecture (which admittedly isn’t a Millennium Problem) but that doesn’t mean I have any shot at the Field’s Medal.</p>