<p>Actually, my option is going to be Engineering and Applied Science: Aeronautics (hence the SURF topic). Astrophysics is just for fun. Really.</p>
<p>G2 - I will also be SURFing this summer. I can't wait til June. The prefrosh are staying in one of the off-campus houses. Looks like we'll be in the same house or roommates (weird huh!)</p>
<p>Do you know what you're doing yet?</p>
<p>Oh hi, I was just editing my text because I don't know if you're m or f.</p>
<p>Yes, I do know. I will be researching at JPL with the Computer Vision Group. I'll be testing the Mars Science Lab's (a rover) computer vision. This is like my dream job, and I'm getting paid. ;)</p>
<p>Oh, I saw the edit and I thought, hmm... I wonder why.... Well I'm a guy. I'm actually surprised that more girls would be SURFers, though with the usual small population size of n approximately equal to 7 or so, it's hard to draw conclusions.</p>
<p>Do the JPL people still live at Tech?</p>
<p>I've met only one other male Axline SURFer. All the rest (3) were girls. </p>
<p>I'm not exactly sure what you mean. All the SURFers that are researching at JPL stay at Caltech. All the Prefrosh are all staying in Wilson, one of the off-campus houses. I assume you will also be staying there?</p>
<p>Is the Guggenheim Aeronautical Lab the one with the kickass wind tunnel?</p>
<p>Yeah, I'm staying at Wilson. And yes, Guggenheim has the supposedly awesome wind tunnel. I've yet to see it for real, though.... I've only been in the Guggenheim building to see my prof in his office.</p>
<p>Do you have an IM address?</p>
<p>or are you posting on the Caltech Admit site?</p>
<p>The Caltech Admit site is kaput from my end... it never works. I do have a screen name, but I don't want to post it here.</p>
<p>Yeah, I don't like posting mine either.<br>
Are you D.L?</p>
<p>"That is quite amazing that you got WL at MIT. Oh well, that place is becoming a rancid TTT. If you want diversity, you go to Harvard or Stanford. If you want the real tech experience, then Caltech beats MIT hands-down."</p>
<p>I cant believe your still bitter over rejection.</p>
<p>This year has been great Putnam 1st place, pistol first place and other great things including Wilczek winning Nobel</p>
<p>Politzer won a Nobel too :)</p>
<p>In any case, I wouldn't say MIT is becoming a rancid TTT, but it /is/ becoming a second-rate Harvard. There's no doubt that it is denying Axline-quality scientists to admit, in their place, girls and minorities of middling intellectual talent, plus singers, dancers, water polo players, etc. who would get mauled by many Caltech kids in a head-to-head academic match-up. Let me say, first, that there's nothing wrong with that in itself. It is certainly MIT's right as a university, and it makes for a diverse and vibrant community.</p>
<p>But let's not kid ourselves: Harvard is, and probably will be for a long time yet, the top (certainly most prestigious) dog in the "diverse and high-quality" niche. Its immense prestige is a huge draw in every field, especially outside the hard sciences. It will be a long time before MIT can beat them in competing head-to-head for the plum extracurricular/humanities kids. Maybe never.</p>
<p>Since it's destined to be #2 or worse at Harvard's game for a while, does it really make sense for MIT to become widely known for abandoning honestly meritocratic science and engineering-centered admissions (and ceding that crown to Caltech)? Isn't that how MIT made the name it's so famous for in the first place? It seems like a confused strategy to me -- losing the bragging rights of a community based on pure smarts (which it had for a long time) <em>AND</em> having to be crushed by Harvard at the diversity/prestige game.</p>
<p>This isn't bitterness, by the way. I've am at peace with the wonderful place that is MIT, and if they hired me as a consultant and tied my pay to their long-term success, I would tell them exactly what I said above.</p>
<p>Eh, my previous post was a bit harsh. Good thing that Ben's such a good writer. MIT should drop the pretense of having a meritocratic admissions process, although the truth has already been leaking out. Just the other day, I talked to someone here who didn't even apply to MIT for this reason (and he probably would've been a strong candidate for MIT, getting accepted here and one of HYS).</p>
<p>I personally believe that one of the reasons MIT has totally awesome kids who win the Putnam competition and stuff like that is that it's easier for students to get drawn to the popular image that the school has. Sure, it's an incredibly awesome school, but even then, the image is just an image. I personally don't know MIT as well as I know Tech, but I'd imagine that a good proportion of MIT's students would get crushed by Core.</p>
<p>I might too.</p>
<p>Hey look, the "Age" thing under my name turned from 17 to 18 last night. ;-)</p>
<p>What I wonder is why do RSI'ers brag about turning down Axline from Caltech for MIT/Harvard?</p>
<p>Ben Golub, very nice argument - I said that a summer program practiced arbitrary admissions though I forgot about the phrase "although there's nothing wrong with that" and was ummm...flamed.</p>
<p>simfish -- sad that you were flamed, people aren't nice. : (</p>