<p>What would all you math grads estimate the minimum IQ is for a major in applied mathematics (at the undergrad level) to finish with a decent GPA?</p>
<p>A math SAT score above the 75th percentile of whichever college you are attending would put you into a good initial position. After that, grades are mainly a function of hard work rather than “talent.”</p>
<p>That’s very interesting. Most of the math majors I’ve spoken with have said that I would be crazy to consider it (I only got a 32 ACT math score) and should stick with econ/finance or something like that. I really liked MVC, but I’m not a masochist and definitely don’t want to pick a major that I have no aptitude for.</p>
<p>Maybe the department at your college is particularly sadistic, but I think math majors generally like to exaggerate the difficulty of their major. For whatever reason, spending 5 hours on 4 problems feels more frustrating than spending 5 hours on 20 problems, and that’s why upper-level math courses (with fewer but more involved problems) sometimes feel harder than quantitative classes in other fields. But in the end math is a major like any other.</p>
<p>Calculus tends to be a very good indicator for college-level math aptitude. If you have enjoyed the math classes you have taken so far, I encourage you to keep going!</p>
<p>b@r!um, thanks!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m curious why you think so? I have a good number of friends who found calculus easy, enjoyable, and got A+'s in difficult courses where most of the class was having a really hard time, but could not find the energy to put into abstract algebra or linear algebra. Successful engineers. </p>
<p>It depends a large bit on how you think. Thinking like a math major takes a different skill than thinking about other things – for those who do think the correct way, it’s just a matter of working. For others, the energy to think the right way may simply not be there. It depends largely on how much you want it – if you think the right way, the few times you pick up a book and listen to lectures, you will be thinking about the right things, and reading the right things. </p>
<p>While in theory, I don’t think a math major is SUPER hard, plenty of people seem to struggle with things I might find basic, and I know some of these are no less intelligent than I am, just like to think about different things.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So in essence, IQ need not be the only factor.</p>
<p>Check this out</p>
<p>[The</a> Audacious Epigone: IQ estimates by intended college major via SAT scores](<a href=“http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2009/03/iq-estimates-by-intended-college-major.html]The”>http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2009/03/iq-estimates-by-intended-college-major.html)</p>
<p>Many undergraduate math majors take almost exclusively calculus classes: real and complex analysis, (partial) differential equations, differential geometry, differential topology, financial math, math modeling, numerical analysis, statistics, etc. An aptitude for and interest in calculus can carry you a long way. </p>
<p>And then there’s abstract algebra. Worst comes to worst, it’s only a single class and everyone gets through it somehow. I agree that algebra, number theory and combinatorics require a different sort of thinking from calculus, but they are easy enough to avoid if one doesn’t like them. Just like most chemistry majors never take more than a single course on physical chemistry, and most economics majors stay away from advanced macroeconomic theory. </p>
<p>Linear algebra can be hard, but few universities teach an abstract linear algebra course on the first pass. Conceptually linear algebra is very much like multivariable calculus - when you think about it, multivariable calculus is just applied linear algebra.</p>
<p>In my experience, the intro calculus sequence is a very good indicator for how happy students are in upper-level math courses (minus the algebra stuff). Your experience may differ.</p>
<p>I guess if someone likes the actual proofs and theory of calculus, then it’s a good indicator. That plus a good command of linear algebra. I don’t think you can really do anything without linear algebra – as you say, when we try to naturally generalize calculus to higher dimensions, a clean theory of linear algebra is necessary in order to do analogues of linear approximation (not so fun checks that this and that are independent of coordinate choice in differential topology follow as well). </p>
<p>I agree someone can just get through abstract algebra if it’s not their thing, just that I really think the individual needs to do some proof-based math first. If we assume calculus and multivariable calculus are somewhat rigorously taught, even with a sprinkling of the linear algebra need to generalize to more coordinates, then sure.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It does depend how it is taught, of course – linear algebra is fairly ubiquitous, and in some ways it could be construed as closest to algebra itself, in particular an instance where algebra is extremely well-behaved and cleanly classified. </p>
<p>Engineers at my school often hated the basic linear algebra course, and hated the upper division one (if they took it) more! Admittedly, our linear algebra courses can be taught by professors into things like number theory, so that may not be so good :D</p>
<p>I’m putting all this out there not to say your experience isn’t probably right, but to make sure it’s said in this thread that a math major really can be quite unfun to someone who really liked calculus and multivariable calculus, depending on the school. Because at my school, there’s a basic linear algebra, upper division linear algebra, and abstract algebra requirement, not to mention that the most consistently offered geometry course is algebraic topology, and differential topology may well require upper division linear algebra.</p>
<p>^^ Your school being Berkeley, which, to be fair, has a much more rigorous math curriculum than my state uni. Although I haven’t taken linear algebra, I know a couple humanities-majors (gasp) who had it at the introductory level and didn’t find it “that” hard. I suppose I’ll just take as many math courses as I can until I can’t take it anymore ;)</p>
<p>The thing about Linear Algebra is that it can be made either rather easy (relatively speaking) or difficult. Computing determinants, change of basis matrices, and the likes is pretty easy. Proving that there exist an orthonormal basis, consisting of eigenvectors, for every n x n symmetric matrix, on the other hand, is not so easy.</p>
<p>With that out of the way, I think the Calc series is a necessary condition, though not necessarily sufficient. That is to say, just because you can do computational calculus doesn’t mean you will excel as a math major and solve the Riemann Hypothesis. However, if you can’t do plug-n-chug, this could be slightly troublesome. </p>
<p>In either case, I would recommend glancing at some proof-y stuff. It may not be difficult, per se, but if you don’t appreciate the beauty of proofs then the whole thing will be rather unpleasant. A love of proof is a better indicator than computational Calculus skills.</p>
<p>The only thing that worries about me Calc series in general is that sometimes it gives people the wrong idea about math. Especially if its just computational.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I hope the real spectral theorem is not routinely assigned as a homework problem :D</p>