<p>What actually is Math 103X? I get that it's honors class and
more theoretical, but does that mean it requires lot of proofs
and pure math, rather than applied math?</p>
<p>Is Math 103X very hard?</p>
<p>what is your math background like? i have been told that 103 (not x) is very hard, but the person who told me that had only taken math through BC calculus in high school.</p>
<p>It has an easier curve than 103, but requires more proofs. It has more difficult material, but it is easier to get a better grade (very few people get a C or lower)</p>
<p>I've only taken BC Calc (score of 5). But I studied little bit of Linear Algebra from Linear Algebra Done Right and absolutely hated. I am not good at abstract math and I guess more proofs means, more abstract?</p>
<p>103x is not more abstract per se, as linear algebra will turn out to be. it really depends on the professor who teaches it, but you probably will go more in depth in certain topics, perhaps do the proofs in class, but you're not really required to do proofs on the test. on my first test though, we were expected to derive the gram-schmidt orthogonalization process step by step, with guidelines (it pertained to the vector section at the beginning of the course), but this is really something you do in linear algebra. Anyway, I mean that the tests in 103x will be harder, the kids will be on average a LOT more math oriented, so unless you're good at math don't expect it to be an easy class. And plus, no one will ever care you took 103x over 103, but people will care whether you got an A or a B in multivariable calculus.</p>
<p>oh and being "good" at math does not mean getting a 5 on ap calc bc. it means going to math competitions and handling them decently.</p>
<p>Wow, lol, we didn't even get to the gram-schmidt process until the second half of math 107, near the end. That is somewhat abstract then.</p>
<p>I enjoyed Math 103X thoroughly because Tom Witelski taught it. The professor made the class fantastic, and I would take the added material and speed of 103X with Witelski over a less engaging professor in a slower-paced 103 class if I had to rechoose. I only had Calc BC from high school and had not done any proof-based work before 103X.</p>
<p>This year, Bray is teaching Math 103X. Do you guys
think he's worth it too??</p>
<p>Yeah Tom Witelski is pretty much the man. Too bad he's heading off to Oxford.</p>
<p>I had only taken BC Calc in high school and did well in the class. I wouldn't worry too much as long as you're willing to put in the work.</p>
<p>idk how Bray plans to do 103x, but if it's anything like 103, I'd expect some hard tests and not so stellar grades. My roommate had him for regular 103, he said he's a good teacher and lectures well but his test averages are usually on the low end of the scale.</p>