<p>I asked a similar question in the Graduate section, but I figured I might get an answer here as well.</p>
<p>If my goal is to do anything involving math EXCEPT teaching, is Applied Mathematics simply the better choice? Is there any difference between the job prospects for a Math major vs an Applied Math major? Is getting into Grad school for Applied Math or Math harder for either major?</p>
<p>I’d go with applied math. In a non-academic job, everything you do will be applied. Employers aren’t going to ask you to do proofs with abstract values, you’ll be working with hard data.</p>
<p>Do what you’re interested in! If you’re worried that you won’t get a job if you major in pure Math, then you can always take a lot of numerical courses or other applied math classes. Don’t miss out on exploring theory just because you think it’s useless in the working world. It’s a lot more fun in my opinion, and definitely shows problem solving skills that any employer finds useful. </p>
<p>Besides, the government hires a lot of theoretical mathematicians (the top employer outside of academia), so you can always find something to do besides teaching (which is my goal too! haha).</p>
<p>Just take the right math and outside electives, sell yourself, and you can get hired doing anything you want. If you only take one kind of any class, that limits your options.</p>
<p>Pure Math -> Grad School
Applied Math -> Job after college</p>
<p>"Pure Math -> Grad School
Applied Math -> Job after college "</p>
<p>You can go to graduate school in applied math. And you can get a job with a pure math degree (you may not be doing pure math at your job, but…)</p>
<p>True. I was simply stating the norm. A generalization.</p>
<p>That’s definitely not the norm. Most pure math majors do not go to graduate school. Out of ~40 senior math majors at my college, ~3 plan to go to graduate school in math, ~5 plan to go to graduate school in something else and the rest is planning to work. And considering that my college does not have a single faculty member in applied math, it is safe to say that all of them majored in pure math.</p>
<p>Ok, let me be more specific: pure math will gear you more towards grad school, while applied math will gear you more towards a career. If your goal before you start college is to go to graduate school, most math majors choose pure. If your goal is to work in a certain field where math is applied, most math majors choose applied.</p>
<p>In general, I agree. Unless you want to stay in more pure math areas, you should major in more specific, applied areas: engineering, statistics, computer science, even physics. I think that math (as a major) is a little on the overrated side… it’s good to encourage students to pursue STEM fields, alright, but when people say that math majors are better at economics than economics majors, or better at CS than CS majors, or better at physics than physics majors, I think that’s carrying it a little too far. I think the only fair thing to say is that math majors are better at math than other majors, and then you have to be specific about what you mean by “math”.</p>
<p>Yea, I know what you’re saying. Now that you bring it up: when people say those things, you have to be a little more specific. Econ majors who are also doubling in math do tend to do better in econ than those econ majors without math as a second major. I don’t think those people mean that simply since you are majoring in math, you are better at econ. I think that those math majors who also do econ are better at econ than those who don’t have math. Physics and CS may be similar, but not necessarily. Physics and CS are on the same level as math, and I don’t think there is much of an edge, if any at all, for those Physics or CS majors that are doubling in math. However, I can strongly support that econ idea, because I am an econ/math major who has observed the econ concentrator population at large, but I am not a physics nor a CS major.</p>
<p>What do you mean by saying “Physics and CS are on the same level as Math?” The material in each of those majors is very different, yet related enough that you can benefit form studying both (just like Econ and Math). Hell, I don’t think there’s anything Math can’t benefit. When was the last time you saw a large contributor without the epithet “Physicist/Mathematician” or “Computer Scientist/Mathematician”?</p>
<p>In my CS program the following math courses are required:</p>
<p>Calc I, II, III
Mathematics Modeling
Discrete Mathematics
Probability
Applied Statistics</p>
<p>Many people also take courses like linear algebra, combinatorics. </p>
<p>I don’t think it is necessary to double major in CS/Math but the fields certainly help each other…especially the theoretical side of CS. After taking all those applied/discrete math courses I would have done almost half of the math major. Just would not have done the really pure stuff, like analysis and abstract algebra. Which also means math majors have done the math part of CS.</p>
<p>I meant same level of difficulty</p>
<p>Would going from Applied Math to a Grad degree in Engineering possible?</p>
<p>It is possible, but you would have to spend a year or two taking undergraduate engineering classes in graduate school before you get to the graduate courses. If you don’t have the opportunity to take engineering classes as an undergraduate student, at least get a solid foundation in physics and chemistry (in addition to your math classes) so that you can focus on catching up on the engineering work once in graduate school.</p>
<p>It is interesting how applied/applicable pure math gets once you get beyond the basic abstract courses (real analysis, abstract algebra, point-set topology). Among the applicable math topics I have encountered in my pure math classes this year: PDEs, calculus of variations, cryptology, computational geometry (e.g. for computer graphics), complex analysis (which, surprising for me, solves quite a lot of problems that are stated in real variables) and a course called “geometric analysis” which is taken by both pure math and physics graduate students.</p>
<p>It is quite amazing how even the purest of math topics eventually make it into applications. I got quite excited when I ran into a paper on robot motion planning that used results from CAT(0) geometry (it seemed even less useful than category theory when I first learned about it). I have also seen symplectic manifolds and geometric group theory show up in other fields. Other “advanced” math topics like Homology/Cohomology and Groebner Bases are all over the place.</p>
<p>I am sad that the average pure math major never gets to see these things. Real analysis, abstract algebra and topology really just establish basic mathematical vocabulary and a rigorous foundation for further math. They should be the foundation of a math major, rather than the culmination. I almost stopped taking math classes after these core classes because they seemed so pointless, but now I am so glad that I did not!</p>
<p>I am wondering what our world would look like if other scientists received training in graduate-level math in addition to their own specialty. It seems to take about 50 years before a new math concept is discovered in applied fields. Imagine what we could do today if it didn’t take scientists 50 years to realize that mathematicians have already solved half of their problems!</p>
<p>I just want to say that I completely agree with you and want to let you know that there is someone out there that thinks you are completely right, and appreciates your comment after all this time! (Thumbs up for replying four years later?)</p>
<p>Yes, OrionOx12, thanks for resurrecting this thread. That is a very interesting posting.</p>