<p>Hurray for astrophysics!</p>
<p>Biomath: You can certainly major in biology and take a lot of math classes. Alternatively, you could major in the Engineering and Applied Sciences concentration of "Computational and Neural Systems" (you can check out some of the classes at <a href="http://www.cns.caltech.edu/%5B/url%5D">http://www.cns.caltech.edu/</a>. </p>
<p>I'm not familiar with the courses for the bio schedule, but if you major in bio, as a frosh you can take Math 5 (Intro. to abstract algebra) or Math 6 (Intro. to discrete math), which are year-round courses. There aren't many bio classes 3rd term, so you could take Math 3 (Number theory) or math 4 (introduction to mathematical chaos), both of which are 3rd term only. As a sophomore, I'm pretty sure you can fit in Math 108 (Classical Analysis). Junior and senior schedules vary widely depending on what you concentrate on in your major, so I won't go into that area.<br>
Good luck with your decision!</p>
<p>It seems that the posts from current students are advising against double majoring. </p>
<p>But from my experience, people tend to like a variety of things (even within the already focused fields of science, math, and engineering) and sometimes simply cannot pick to stick with one until graduate school, at the earliest. </p>
<p>Therefore, is this kind of focus on one subject, so early in one's academic career, a rigid rule intrinsic to Caltech's undergrad program? What about overlaps between similar subjects (math and physics)? If there are such, wouldn't this make double majoring more plausible? </p>
<p>Of course, your answer may be that if you're really really smart and really really hard working, then it's possible...</p>
<p>It seems to me that Caltech's undergraduate experience isn't necessarily a time for exploration and uncertainty; even if you know your general path is in that of science/math/engineering. </p>
<p>Because if you have doubts, change your mind, it'll probably take you more than 4 years to graduate?</p>
<p>qx3kbenzene,</p>
<p>I think you're confusing the inability to double-major (i.e. get credit for a second degree) with the lack of ability to explore. The one does not imply the other.</p>
<p>Rather Caltech has such rigorous standards for receiving credit for a major that's it's harder than usual to combine two degrees. At several of the upper end universities I've taught at, the degree requirements for so many areas are so ...umm... flexible that it's easy to double or triple major. In contrast, the minimal math and physics requirements even for someone majoring in history or econ at Caltech are sufficient to get you a math or physics degree -- or to come very close -- at many decent schools.</p>
<p>But that doesn't stop you from learning about and exploring different subjects. You just might find it harder to get two degrees.</p>
<p>In this as in everything, Caltech adheres to the minimum difficulty rule -- the Core is more uniform, and more uniformly rigorous than the Core at any other university, especially for those with an interest in math/science. Ditto for majors. The student who takes the route of least resistance will still have done course work that (in terms of rigor and often breadth) would be well above average for the same major at many good colleges.</p>
<p>Not quite old: Yeah, a math/physics double major is still outlawed.</p>
<p>Hmm... I believe I declared Chemical Engineering as my major this fall... Are we allowed to change our major if we don't like the rigidity of the schedules or something? I'm becoming a little scared, esp. since ChemE is named hardest chem major!!! I'm just curious :)</p>
<p>Ugh...I put down Mechanical Engineering, but I'm thinking Chemical Engineering now :o. Hahah, I won't let this affect my decision though...</p>
<p>dancinchik: Yeah, don't worry, you don't even have to declare your major until the end of freshman year. And you can change it a number of times after that.</p>
<p>"Unless students have done exceptionally well in their freshman and sophomore years, they should not contemplate specializing in mathematics."
-Caltech catalog
For some reason, I find the phrasing of that quite amusing.</p>
<p>:D (10char)</p>
<p>NQO --- I think math/phys double is now permitted in exceptional circumstances, but it has to be approved by the executive officer of PMA... because I'm pretty sure my friend who graduated last year actually did it, but he was an odd duck (in a good way).</p>
<p>I have also spoken to someone who graduated with a bs in math and an ms in physics within four years; he said he needed to take fewer classes to do this then he would have to double major in math/phys. Requirements for double majors at caltech (with few exceptions) add rather than union, so although, for example Ph 229 can be used as elective credit for math and Ma 148 as elective credit for physics, a single class can't be used to satisfy both requirements. However, they can be used to satisfy requirements for a bs in math and an ms in physics, so to get the ms he only needed to take 8 physics courses above 125, and didnt need to take the 6 lab classes required for the physics major.</p>
<p>The labs are probably the biggest reason the math/phys double major is almost infeasible; there are quite a few math majors who take phys 106/125.</p>
<p>But don't you need to apply for grad school to do that?</p>
<p>oh $@#!... is majoring in math THAT hard?</p>
<p>Wow, this is kind of depressing. How hard would applied and computational math (my prospective major) be? Harder than pure math? Also, out of curiosity, what are the easier majors (I realize nothing is truly easy at Caltech ;-)) at the Institute?</p>
<p>No, ACM is easier than pure math. The "easiest" majors are probably various ones in the Humanities -- History, Literature, History and Philosophy of Science, Philosophy.</p>
<p>Vintor -- No, it's not <em>that</em> hard, but if you get B-'s in basic diffeq, then you probably won't enjoy advanced differential geometry.</p>
<p>I'm not sure that everyone would agree that its easier to major in ACM than in math.</p>
<p>Certainly the course requirements are commensurate in amount (and neither major has particularly many requirements), but I imagine most math majors would find the ACM95/101 sequences much harder than Ma5/108/109 sequences required for math majors. ACM classes require a much wider skill set, which includes not only strong analytical skills but also programming/algorithms skills and the ability to manipulate very complicated expressions, while most pure math problems assigned just require one to come up with a few clever (sometimes very clever) ideas to solve them-which if your'e good at math is much less stressful. Moreover, ACM classes (ACM95 in particular) have policies that make them more stressful, such as not giving students enough times on exams, and making exams closed book.</p>
<p>As further evidence, in typical math classes more than half of the class earns A's while in ACM classes the grades are centered around a B.</p>
<p>You make a valid argument... But, of course, note that the final point can be explained by selection effects just as well as by difficulty differences.</p>
<p>I agree though, that for some people math is much easier than ACM.</p>
<p>Still, I'd say math is more difficult in the following sense: under sufficient duress, the top 25% of math majors could do quite well in ACM courses, but the reverse probably isn't true.</p>
<p>Given how few ACM majors there are, im not sure the last statement is true; it seems that many of the top ACM majors could have easily majored in math but chose ACM because they had broader interests (a current senior, who proved Schur's conjecture his freshman year, majored in ACM and published papers in fields from number theory to game theory to theoretical inorganic chemistry in his time here, comes to mind).</p>