<p>Which majors at MIT are most rigorious ?</p>
<p>Aeronautics Engineering?, Economics ? Computer Science ?
Nuclear Engineering ?</p>
<p>It depends on what you're good at! for me mechanical engineering would be very rigorous and mathematics would be a perfect fit and very feasible. however for some people a mathematics major would be the most rigorous of all majors because some people are simply not good at it. if everyone were equally good at everything, then maybe the most difficult major (going by what the major was designed to entail for courses and requirements) would be...chemical engineering? I hear that a lot.</p>
<p>The sheer fact that they're all MIT majors sounds rigorous enough for me, haha.
I'm not a student there yet, so I'll hold off on an actual answer for fear of bias.</p>
<p>Rigorous has a very specific meaning, and I think the answer here is course 6, used to be anyway</p>
<p>I vote for 16 (aero/astro).</p>
<p>I vote for 10 (chemical engineering). Chemical engineering gives you the least freedom (with the most required classes), and from what I've seen, they're genuinely difficult. 16 (aero/astro) is a close second, because it has two heavily design-oriented years (sophomore and senior), both of which consume an inordinate amount of time.</p>
<p>How togh is eecs?</p>
<p>Also for EECS, how much computer science would one need to know going in in order to keep up (at the very least) with the curriculum? I'm potentially interested in computer science (I've heard some cool stuff) but, to be honest, know next to nothing about it; the Java classes at my school suck, and I haven't had the time to teach myself.</p>
<p>Well, 6.001 is the only true programming course that you have to take for sure. Other than that, if you concentrate on the EE side (meaning your electives would be EE,) the other CS courses you take could be highly theoretical and less programming. AI, for instance, has some programming, but a big part is just theoretical. 6.042 (theory of computer science) is all proofs. 6.004 is CS, but is more about building a compiler...that sort of thing.</p>
<p>So if you can get through 6.001, you could get through course 6 if you are good with physics/EE.</p>
<p>Also, they have some IAP courses now designed as primers to programming for those that don't have much experience in it.</p>
<p>But if one doesn't want to focus on the EE side of Course 6, how few EE courses can one take?</p>
<p>^^Well, you could just major in CS, but I'll assume that you want the dual degree.</p>
<p>The requirements for the EECS major:
6.001-6.004 (6.002 is circuits; 6.003 is signals)
4 header courses (forget what they call it) I believe 2 of these have to be on the EE side, but one of your EE header classes can be 8.07, which is advanced electromagnetism.
6.042 (proof-based class on theory of comp. science) or probability
Then you need some electives, and you can choose all CS ones if you want.</p>
<p>So basically, you need to take 6.002, 6.003, and one true EE class. You can substitute advanced electromagnetism for your other EE class.</p>
<hr>
<p>If you major in CS, the only EE classes you need to take are 6.002 and 6.003.</p>
<p>You could also look at 18C, "math with computer science", for a more theoretical approach to CS.</p>
<p>There's actually a whole new set of course 6 requirements going into effect for the class of 2011 -- described [url=<a href="http://www.eecs.mit.edu/ug/newcurriculum/index.html%5Dhere%5B/url">http://www.eecs.mit.edu/ug/newcurriculum/index.html]here[/url</a>]. I don't know much about it, but I do know 6.001 is out, and has been replaced by 6.01 ("Introduction to EECS I").</p>
<p>la montagne, there's a new course, [url=<a href="http://web.mit.edu/6.00/www/%5D6.00%5B/url">http://web.mit.edu/6.00/www/]6.00[/url</a>], designed specifically for students with little to no previous EECS experience.</p>
<p>hm...I've become obsolete.</p>
<p>mollieb,
THANKS for that link. I don't know if S has seen it yet (he's been looking at the catalog for classes to observe when he visits), but I will be sure to point this out. I know he's aware of 18C, but he'll probably be glad to know there's a less EE-ish option in 6 as well.</p>
<p>Talk about your "can of worms" question...</p>
<p>Note to prefrosh: For most MIT students, being strong academically is a big part of their identity, and being able and willing to cope with a lot of academic rigor is also a big part of their identity, as members of the MIT community (it's one of the few things that everyone has in common) and as people. At MIT, if you say, or imply, that somebody's major is not rigorous, you are undermining a big part of their identity, and you are also undermining their status as part of the MIT community/culture.</p>
<p>This doesn't mean that people don't do it (unfortunately). But it means that, unlike at many other schools, them's fightin' words, and you should expect people to become frothingly angry (whether they express that anger to you or not) if you insult them in that way.</p>
<p>To actually address the question...you can have an extremely rigorous program in any major. There are certain majors where it is mandatory in order to be in that major, because there are a whole lot of specific requirements (e.g. 16, 20), or because there are certain requirements that are very difficult (e.g. 8, with its Junior Lab requirement). If someone is in that major, and succeeding, you know that they have their nose to the grindstone. There are other majors where you <em>could</em> get people cruising through/slacking off, and it is not an inherent certainty that a student in that major has a relatively rigorous program, generally because the majors in question have almost no specific requirements (e.g. 9, 18). That does not mean that the people in those majors are there to slack off. They could have just as tough a program as you, it's just one that they picked for themselves rather than a mandated one.</p>
<p>Also, some majors do have a higher workload than others, because some place a higher priority on problem sets or labs than others. This doesn't make the classes harder or easier. I've had classes with no required work, other than tests, that were harder than other classes I've had that were very hosing.</p>
<p>Why should anyone care what the "most rigorous majors" are? It's what you, the student, put into a program that makes it challenging (or not). Take the courses that interest you. </p>
<p>Sounds to me like prestige-seeking. Yuck. OP, go drink from the firehose and then tell us what at MIT's NOT rigorous.</p>
<p>How is course 9?</p>
<p>structure is different from rigor.</p>
<p>course 8 and course 18 are probably the two least structured majors at MIT, but the classes in those departments, especially at the graduate level, are arguably the most intellectually demanding in all MIT.</p>
<p>but this discussion is stupid anyway. take what you want to take. intellectual wanking is a waste of time.</p>
<p>I am interested in both Course 2 and Course 6. Unfortunately it is impossible for me to do both ( I checked out the requirements.... and it would NOT be fun to finish in 4 years) I'll only have taken Comp Sci AB. Although my teacher is super good, like pretty much everyone that stays in his class gets 5s, and I have one of the highest grade in the class without trying much, I am not sure if it will be enough for prep for 6. Seems like everyone I know that wants to do course 6 is either like USACO Gold Div, or already won money from that battlecode IAP. For mechE, it feels like everyone starts more on the same level-ish (some people will be profficient in SolidWorks , Inventor etc. and know about different designs like omni, mecanum, etc. but still starting with the basics)</p>