<p>Is it the material? The workload? The way things are taught? What is it that makes it harder than other top schools (from what people say)?</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>It is the material taught and what you have to take.</p>
<p>For example, math 1a ‘Calculus of One and Several Variables’ is equivalent to the upper division (aka courses that people generally take at earliest at the end of their first year/during their second year or more commonly in their 3rd/4th year) math course at pretty much any other college (ex it is Princeton’s math 320, Cal’s math 104, Stanford’s math 115, etc).</p>
<p>However, the material in Caltech’s math 1a is a lot friendlier than the real analysis counterparts at other colleges, but it’s still pretty challenging if you’ve never thought abstractly in your life.</p>
<p>If you don’t know, real analysis is supposed to be one of the most challenging undergraduate classes at ANY university for MATH majors/concentrators, and Caltech forces EVERYONE to take it.</p>
<p>About two years back we attended a conference held by MIT admission representatives traveling to our area. The conference hall was packed, I had to stay outside so I had a nice and long chat with an MIT alumni who was helping at their information desk. The gentleman got his BS and MS in engineering from MIT and was working at Standford at that time. I asked him to compare Cal tech with MIT students, he said, they (Caltech) are smarter, work harder, but we had fun. I asked him to give a quantitative qualifier about how hard it is, he said, you need to study 70 hours a week at Caltech, 50 hours at MIT, 40 hours at Stanford. </p>
<p>Since I am not going to study 70 hours a week, I am sending my son to Cal tech, because I know to be successful you really need to put into hard effort.</p>
<p>Being a senior here at Caltech, I think people tend to exaggerate how hard Caltech is. It’s tough, but if you’re willing to put in the work, it’s definitely manageable. Also, the first two terms are pass/fail to give freshmen time to adjust to the school.</p>
<p>The main difference (I think) between Caltech and other colleges is the way it handles exams. All exams are take home, and almost all are open note and book, and so they tend to be longer and more difficult than proctored exams at other schools. But again, if you take the time to learn the material through homework and collaborating with classmates, you should be fine.</p>
<p>And in response to Foraminifera, I don’t think Ma 1a is nearly as difficult as people make it sound. It’s basically a proof based approach to single variable calculus. It was challenging for me my freshman year because I had never taken a proof based mathematics course, but it’s really not that bad. Plus, it’s pass/fail.</p>
<p>So if a student’s been doing proof based stuff, say upper division dif. equ/dynamical systems/real analysis, then the transition to Caltech freshman math might be ok? What about for students who, um, aren’t used to working terribly hard? A shock to the system?</p>
<p>sbjdorlo, may be you might be ok having already taken those classes, but still there is NO GUARANTEE. However, here is the bottom line: See whether you can comfortably answer some questions, such as given below, at anytime, and without much studying or preparatory work.</p>
<p>(1) Prove that the limit of f(x)=cube root of x, as x tends to “a” is equal to the cube root of “a”, using the epsilon-delta definition of the limit. Here “a” is any real number.
(2) Determine the convergence or divergence of the infinite series sigma Sin(n)/n^2 where “n” runs from 1 to infinity
(3) Prove that sqrt(3) +sqrt(5) is an irrational number, using the definition.</p>
<p>I think, if you can do such problems without great discomfort, things might be somewhat ok for you at Caltech. If not, you really must have to work real hard. Caltech is BAD NEWS (I repeat, REAL bad news) for those so-called “smart kids” coming from high school, who have never developed good work ethics.</p>
<p>Here is another thing I have started noticing recently. However, I am not entirely sure whether I am very accurate on this observation, or it could be just a feeling. Traditionally, Caltech does not practice affirmative action, but lately I have been wondering whether they have relaxed their policies a bit. Sometimes it seems like, in order to balance either the gender ratio, or ethnic diversity, they have been admitting candidates with weaker backgrounds. But the problem is that, this is in fact a great disservice to the candidates themselves. Getting admission to Caltech is not the problem, but the actual survival is a significant issue for those students. </p>
<p>Well, see whether you can answer mathematical questions like above (1)-(3) feel free to ask for some more, if you would like the challenge. </p>
<p>Anyways, good luck to you at Caltech!</p>
<p>Uh, I’m the parent of a student admitted to Caltech. I’m not even sure what language you just wrote in! LOL</p>
<p>I’ll pass this along to my son and see if he’s able to take a stab at it. fwiw, he says he’s looking forward to being challenged and working hard wherever he goes, so all is not lost, hopefully.</p>
<p>Also, my son is a URM but my guess is that he has the background to do the work at Caltech, MIT, etc, and would have been admitted based on his performance on national math and physics competitions as well as his physics research and math/physics college coursework. I could be wrong, though. I always though Caltech would be too intense but he’ll have to make that decision for himself.</p>
<p>Thanks for the input, T.A.D.</p>
<p>sbj, yes, I think your son must be ok if he has the right attitude. Much more than his good current credentials, having the right attitude is probably the single most driving force that will take a student through the extreme rigor at Caltech.</p>
<p>BTW, there is nothing wrong with being a URM. I am a URM myself, and it shouldn’t take any credit away from your son’s good work. However, more than the accolades themselves, the bottom-line, as I said before, is the permanent knowledge of the subject matter, at any time ( different from the knowledge when you get by cramming for a test - that is really the temporary knowledge).</p>
<p>Good luck to your son - he certainly looks like a bright kid and should be able to survive the school with some good hard work. Again, don’t worry about the advantages some URM’s are getting.</p>
<p>T.A.D., my S is an admitted student who plans on going to Caltech next year. I sent him your problems (which are all Greek to me) and got the following responses: “3 is not that hard (I’m not sure if you have to prove that the square roots are irrational themselves but that’s a very famous result), 2 is easy and 1 is tedious but all it really takes is some jiggling.” Not sure if he is blowing smoke, but now that I have gotten his interest, how about a couple more?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Caltech doesn’t practice affirmative action, so being a urm is irrelevant to admissions.</p>
<p>What makes Caltech harder than other schools is that many classes are taught at a more advanced level compared to corresponding courses at other places. Ph 2b stat mech was taught at a more advanced level than the graduate level stat mech I took this year at Stanford. Freshman physics (theoretical track) is a junior year physics course for physics majors at most other places. Engineering and physics sophomores/juniors take ACM 95 with 1st year grad students. The graduate level fluid mechanics course I took this year was about the same level as the class I took at Tech as a junior. In general, it seems like Caltech students learn significantly more theory and math in a given class relative to classes elsewhere. Also, Caltech students typically take 5 classes a quarter, where most places on the quarter system such as Northwestern or Stanford usually have students take 4 courses a quarter.</p>
<p>Sometimes it’s the pace. Ph 2A crams an MIT physics course on waves and vibrations into 5 weeks, followed by cramming a course on quantum mechanics into the remaining 5 weeks. Ma 1a is an analysis based version of calculus, which at most places would be a full year course.</p>
<p>All engineering schools more or less teach the same things. However, it amuses me that what’s considered graduate level material at Stanford is taught to Caltech sophomores.</p>
<p>what if I can’t immediately solve those problems off-hand and would have to look at some notes for a refresh of my memory? am I pretty much screwed? x) I’ve done problems like those before but I just don’t remember how to do them off-hand because it’s been awhile. However, I can say that I do have a good work ethic and am willing to work hard. Should I consider going to Caltech this fall? or does long-term memory of how to solve problems like these really overrule a good work ethic?</p>
<p>I couldn’t have done those problems before I came to Tech and I did just fine in Ma1a. The majority of students have not done any real proofs before coming to Tech and that why Caltech reteaches single variable calculus to everyone to make sure everyone knows how to do proofs.</p>
<p>So far, (I have only had 2 terms), Caltech is definitely difficult but it is not overwhelming unless you want it to. Will you be working late into the night on problem sets? Yes. Will you have no time to do anything besides sets and maybe a little bit of sleeping? No. </p>
<p>In regards to OP’s question, Caltech is difficult because as the above posters said, the material is hard (we almost always use the hardest/most comprehensive textbook for any given subject), we go through it quickly (cover all of mechanics in 10 weeks), and we take comparatively many of these classes (usually equivalent to between 5 and 6 classes at another quarter system school). </p>
<p>I would also argue that one reason that Caltech is difficult because almost all classes approach whatever they are studying from a mathematical/axiomatic/theoretical point of view which means that everything is built from first principle which is both awesome (we just derived magnetism from the special relativity correction to electricity! 
) and more difficult.</p>
<p>Quote:
“what if I can’t immediately solve those problems off-hand and would have to look at some notes for a refresh of my memory? am I pretty much screwed? x) I’ve done problems like those before but I just don’t remember how to do them off-hand because it’s been awhile. However, I can say that I do have a good work ethic and am willing to work hard. Should I consider going to Caltech this fall? or does long-term memory of how to solve problems like these really overrule a good work ethic?”</p>
<p>cerritoskid: Don’t worry. If you have great work ethics, you can always work hard to become more familiar with the type problems that I have indicated. So, don’t worry too much, as most probably you will be fine. However, here is a good idea: You will be doing yourself a huge favor if you do a substantial amount of those epsilon-delta proofs before you start at Caltech. If you would like to see a few more problems of that kind, I can put some more (for other people’s benefit too) Good luck to you at Caltech, and definitely don’t get scared before you enter that great institution. If you have a great passion for science/mathematics, combined with great work ethics, you should be fine!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A bit off topic, but to defend other schools, I think it really depends on your fields as to what the expectations are. I’ve found Caltech undergrads to be stellar at doing proofs, deriving equations, and, in general, great at things that involve playing with numbers. However whenever I ask a conceptual question on a homework/quiz/test I get answers that are all over the map, and occasionally so fundamentally scientifically wrong it’s embarrassing. :(</p>
<p>To me, what made Caltech very difficult as a grad student was the focus on the math/derivations and less on developing a strong intuition and conceptual understanding of a topic. I know a number of times I’d sit there doing problem sets and forget which class it was even for since the math for each class was pretty much the same (all we’d do is change some boundary conditions a little or which letters we were using for variables).</p>
<p>Finally, ACM95/100 is, for many engineers at other schools, a junior level course. The difference is at Caltech that all engineering students are required to take it. I actually used the same text for ACM100b/c in my undergrad math class as here. The only real difference was the addition of Complex Analysis for 100a, which, frankly, for anyone who didn’t have it in undergrad is probably a waste of time in grad school anyway (all I got out of it is how those integrals it seems like you can’t integrate are integrable).</p>
<p>Is Caltech at all cooperative or only competitive? Do students work together or are they competing against one another?</p>
<p>99% cooperation.</p>
<p>Hi
As an admitted caltech student, I would like to know if it would be “too hard” for me? Most prefrosh and undergrads I talked to at prefrosh weekend were coming with private schools or rigorous public schools and most had experience with linear algebra and differential equations. I’ve however only gone up to calc BC. Also, most students had been admitted also to multiple other top schools like MIT, Stanford, Yale, Princeton, but I’ve been rejected from both MIT and Stanford; would that mean I only got admitted due to luck and do not really have the skills to survive at caltech?
any response would be much appreciated and thank you.</p>
<p>They wouldn’t have admitted you if they don’t feel you have the tools to get by.</p>
<p>So, what is the average GPA for a freshman after only one graded term? And, what is this I hear about grade deflation and that changing?</p>