Is the average high school student today a better Mathematician than MIT entrants of 1869?

[The Outsider]

The burden of proof (providing evidence etc.) is on you - since you claimed that your list of criteria is as close as possible to what Universities use for selection criteria. Besides, you will also have to prove that similar criteria is suitable to rank mathematicians across eras ( your proposed subject of study).

None of the admissions committees I know of use a 'well defined (unambiguous) comparator to sort the objects in contention of the comparison'. In the absence of which they are all trolls. And that you need all this to decide whether the chances of the average high school student of today contributing in the field of Mathematics is less or more than a MIT student in 1869 tells me not to waste any more time on you. Have fun designing your sorting algorithm using a 'well defined (unambiguous) comparator to sort the objects in contention of the comparison' for admissions committees, preferably after you figure out how averages work when combining two samples. :facepalm:

[Sachin=GOD]

yeh thread kahan se kahan chali gayi :facepalm:

[flamy]

EVEN Zelig will get these right with his eyes shut

:cantstop::cantstop::hysterical::hysterical:

[akshayxyz]

None of the admissions committees I know of use a 'well defined (unambiguous) comparator to sort the objects in contention of the comparison'. In the absence of which they are all trolls.

Perhaps, you forgot to comprehend this (you are advised to get your comprehension reviewed): "Besides, you will also have to prove that similar criteria is suitable to rank mathematicians across eras ( your proposed subject of study)." and this "With all this & more go on and publish the paper, get it peer reviewed from experts of the field, and if you get thumbs up - then live happily until you die or until someone comes and disproves the objectivity of your research objectively."

And that you need all this to decide whether the chances of the average high school student of today contributing in the field of Mathematics is less or more than a MIT student in 1869 tells me not to waste any more time on you.

Please refer to the topic of your post, which goes like: "Is the average high school student today a better Mathematician than MIT entrants of 1869?" When one uses the word "better" while comparing two or more objects - objectively/mathematically, it becomes extremely important to unambiguously define the basis of comparison, i.e. comparator.

Have fun designing your sorting algorithm using a 'well defined (unambiguous) comparator to sort the objects in contention of the comparison' for admissions committees, preferably after you figure out how averages work when combining two samples. :facepalm:

Does not concern me. That was a suggestion for you, as I think it will help to increase the likelihood of acceptance of your proposed research results (i.e. comparisons of mathematicians separated by 130+ years) in scientific community.

[punjabi_khota]

It depends on what you know' date=' and what I know and then we can see the intersection/union and stuff. :P[/quote'] I know how the process works, and the way it was described by Outy :dontknow: You seem to have other ideas ?

[punjabi_khota]

I guess the whole point of Akshayxyz's comments was to randomly sprinkle big words and terms which no University uses in actual admissions process, and show off some technical sounding algo related knowledge.

[flamy]

I guess the whole point of Akshayxyz's comments was to randomly sprinkle big words and terms which no University uses in actual admissions process' date=' and show off some technical sounding algo related knowledge.[/quote'] I think ur just Outy's beetch. :finger:

[punjabi_khota]

I think ur just Outy's beetch. :finger:

I like talking abt math stuffz :woot:

[The Outsider]

Please refer to the topic of your post, which goes like: "Is the average high school student today a better Mathematician than MIT entrants of 1869?" When one uses the word "better" while comparing two or more objects - objectively/mathematically, it becomes extremely important to unambiguously define the basis of comparison, i.e. comparator.

Or maybe when one uses the word 'better' and then explains the context in post #4, it is simply because the thread and poll titles have word limits.

[The Outsider]

I guess the whole point of Akshayxyz's comments was to randomly sprinkle big words and terms which no University uses in actual admissions process' date=' and show off some technical sounding algo related knowledge.[/quote'] Or maybe he just doesn't want us to miss Nirvanam. :nice:

[akshayxyz]

I know how the process works, and the way it was described by Outy :dontknow: You seem to have other ideas ?

As I said - I do not know what you know - or what you want to know. Besides processes and criteria vary from one discipline to another. For MBA it would be different from MS. Even more, criteria for MBA (HVD) would be different from MBA(MIT), MBA(Stanford), MBA( IIM), MBA(ISB), MBA(Symbiosis) etc.... Same applies for BTech/BS across univs, MS across univs. I know few of the above, and I know the parts I do not know. It depends what one is aiming for and prepare accordingly to maximize the chances.

[akshayxyz]

Capable of bigger achievements in the field of Mathematics. Their likelihood of publishing research papers in internationally reputed refereed journals' date= their potential to carry out independent research, their ability to contribute to prevailing industries of their times, their potential to earn higher wages, their likelihood of getting future appointments in top universities and institutes.

[Shehezaada]

Doc Sahab, are you a professor in math, physics...or was it something else?

[straight.drive]

:omg: Never thought Sachin vs Bradman argument could take these many avatars in as many threads. May be we need to have a separate sub-forum for this.

[The Outsider]

Lets take the first sentence of your post #4. Do you think it qualifies as an unambiguous criterion?

Yes. Experts in the field of Math, would be able to rank achievements made in their field. There might not be a consensus amongst everyone and some achievements might rank equal to others, and that makes the criteria subjective but there is nothing ambiguous about it.

[akshayxyz]

I guess the whole point of Akshayxyz's comments was to randomly sprinkle big words and terms which no University uses in actual admissions process' date=' and show off some technical sounding algo related knowledge.[/quote'] You (& Outy) are advised to re-read the topic starting from first post, and observe where/when the reference to university admission process was brought into, and where/when did I point out the suspected irrelevance of the same in process of ranking mathematicians separated by 130+ years. As I understood - OP's intends to rank the mathematicians spread over/separated by 130+ years. I suggested to define the comparison criteria as unambiguously as possible so as to increase the likelihood of the acceptance of his/her/it's research topic. As it is possible that in future some scientists/mathematicians may not find the criteria unambiguous/extensive enough. I think, that is the best possible way for OP's research to achieve immortality in annals of science/maths/stats.

[akshayxyz]

Yes. Experts in the field of Math' date=' would be able to rank achievements made in their field. There might not be a consensus amongst everyone and some achievements might rank equal to others, and that makes the criteria subjective but there is nothing ambiguous about it.[/quote'] "Capable of bigger achievements in the field of Mathematics." Let me ask again - Is this statement by itself unambiguous enough?

[flamy]

Or maybe he just doesn't want us to miss Nirvanam. :nice:

Was Nirvanam banned? :P

[Jadoo]

Was Nirvanam banned? :P

Nah, he is on holiday's visiting Maya.

[The Outsider]

"Capable of bigger achievements in the field of Mathematics." Let me ask again - Is this statement by itself unambiguous enough?

It's completely unambiguous. It seems you also have a problem differentiating between ambiguous and subjective, amongst a whole host of other things.