Is this true?

<ol>
<li><p>Correlation does not mean causation</p></li>
<li><p>"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." --Mark Twain.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Molecular Biologist/Mollie hopeful with MIT Admit Data: Creates "amazing spreadsheets and multicolored graphs", statistics, and a "probability" of getting into MIT</p>

<p>Engineer Hopeful with MIT Admit Data: Constructs a model of the MIT admissions process and finds way to optimize himself to fit said model (Which is by the way baaaad)</p>

<p>Neuroscience hopeful with MIT Admit Data: Constructs a neural network to compare their application to the application of people who were admitted.</p>

<p>Me (Pure Mathematics) hopeful with MIT Admit Data: Constructs a hypothetical function R such that R(p) (Where p is a person, yep that’s right a function of a person, I said hypothetical) would be a numerical representation of an applicant in comparison to other applicants. Constructs hypothetical operator M with the domain being the function R so that if M(R(p)) is greater than a certain constant C (Unknown incidentally) the applicant is admitted to MIT. Shows that M(R(p)) is greater than C for at least one p under the assumption of the Generalized Riemann Hypothesis. Proudly announces that it is, almost definitely (as heuristic evidence would suggest) possible to be accepted into MIT.</p>

<p>Yes I realize how patently ridiculous and abusive of definitions that is, however it is intended as hyperbole. </p>

<p>...On a more serious note...I do have something to write on this topic which is truely marvelous however it is too large to fit in this margin (Sorry...sorry, a spin off of the statement of Fermats Last Theorem for those who did not catch it...right...serious) ...it has however given me the idea for a rather interesting project which I will write something on in a bit...however for now my Number Theory problem set calls...which is due in twelve hours...so I should probably do that first...eh I will remember to write about it later (or the e-mails informing me of replies to this thread will, either way)...ugh...already I have 5 firefox tabs open for relevant research...the day really needs more hours.</p>

<p>"On a more serious note...I do have something to write on this topic which is truely marvelous however it is too large to fit in this margin (Sorry...sorry, a spin off of the statement of Fermats Last Theorem for those who did not catch it...right...serious)"</p>

<p>Haha, I caught it, and I'm not even huge into math!</p>

<p>"the day really needs more hours."</p>

<p>Or the body should be able to go with less sleep. Why do we sleep?... it's baffled psychologists for a while, although I personally think the answer is "because we're tired"!</p>

<p>"Second, I don't think any applicant has the luxury of believing he or she is almost guaranteed admission to MIT until he or she is clutching a letter of acceptance, regardless of their stats/passion/what have you. Not very many people are admitted each year, so everyone ought to hope for the best, but prepare for the worst."</p>

<p>I beg to differ. If you go to my school, and have close to a 4.0 GPA and killer SAT's and are an IMO silver medalist I am pretty sure you are guaranteed admission. I don't want to name this student but he was so confident that he didnt apply to any schools EA and only applied to MIT and one other compeitive school RD.
He got accepted to Clay Math Institute, was IMO medalist, and was very good at computing olympiad. Plus he was our #1 math student. If you are the #1 math student in my school and everything else is decent, my math coach will definitely make sure you get in.</p>

<p>Schroedinger's cat got into MIT; Schroedinger's cat did not get into MIT.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Yeah.</p>

<p>33% chance? You're making things seem too easy. It's 14% booyah! Hmmm, well, just weight for a thick acceptance envelope...</p>