Math Methods Vs. Analysis Track

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the choice between the Math 121A/121B mathematical methods track and the Math 104/185 real/complex analysis track for students in Engineering Physics at Cal. The consensus among professors and advisors favors the Math 121 sequence, as it covers essential topics such as complex analysis, integral transforms, PDEs, and series solutions, which are more applicable to future courses in quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, and materials science. While real analysis is valuable, it is deemed less relevant for the practical applications in upper division physics courses.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of mathematical methods for scientists and engineers
  • Familiarity with partial differential equations (PDEs)
  • Knowledge of complex numbers and integration techniques
  • Basic concepts of quantum mechanics and electromagnetism
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the curriculum of Math 121A/121B at UC Berkeley
  • Explore applications of integral transforms in physics
  • Study the relevance of complex analysis in materials science
  • Investigate the role of real analysis in advanced mathematics courses
USEFUL FOR

Engineering Physics students, academic advisors, and anyone considering the impact of mathematical coursework on future studies in physics and materials science.

Ethan Klein
Messages
18
Reaction score
2
Hi Everyone,

I am transferring to Cal in the fall for Engineering Physics and am currently deciding which math track to take. The first option is to enroll in math 121A/121B, which are mathematical methods courses for scientists and engineers (covers series, complex numbers/integration, PDE's, etc, in an applied manner). My other option is to enroll in math 104/185, which are real/complex analysis, respectively.

In the long run, I plan to go to grad school for materials science, primarily focussing on research in batteries and solid state devices. While I do enjoy pure mathematics, I want to enroll in math courses that will prepare me for what is to come in my junior and senior years and beyond (QM, E&M, Solid State, MatSci, etc). Among the profs and advisers I have spoken to, the general consensus is to go for the math methods track. However, I am curious to know if forgoing real/complex analysis will hamper me in any future courses (especially those that are math/physics related) and/or my understanding of upper div/grad level material?

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ethan Klein said:
Among the profs and advisers I have spoken to, the general consensus is to go for the math methods track.
I agree with your advisors. Also, in most cases your adviser will give you better advice than random people on the internet.

Ethan Klein said:
However, I am curious to know if forgoing real/complex analysis will hamper me in any future courses (especially those that are math/physics related) and/or my understanding of upper div/grad level material?
1 minute on Google tells me that the math 121 sequence covers complex analysis:
https://math.berkeley.edu/courses/fall-2019-math-121a-001-lec
The other topics covered in the math methods courses (integral transforms, PDEs, series solutions to ODEs and special functions, calculus of variations, etc) are way more useful than real analysis. However, once you have taken the math methods courses, if you still really want to learn real analysis and it fits in your schedule then you can go ahead and take it for fun. Just note that a real analysis course will not help with the vector calculus (or almost any other subject, for that matter) you will use in your upper division physics courses.

jason
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
41
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K