- #1

- 10

- 0

Could you give me your thoughts on the following?:

I am currently doing double major in math an physics, and doing pretty alright in both (although better in physics than in math). My long term goal is to get a PhD in pure math, because although I love physics, math has been my passion for some time (four years or so). I talked about this with my math advisor and he straight out told me that I have no talent in pure mathematics and that it would be wiser not to persist with it. He suggested that I focus on applied math or physics instead.

Thus far, I have taken 3 proof intensive classes: logic and set theory, geometry, and complex analysis. I'll admit, logic and set theory was difficult for me, and my performance was not stellar (B-). Geometry, was, however, by far the most beautiful math class I have taken - it came naturally, almost intuitively, to me. I am current taking complex analysis (taught by my advisor), and I am not doing that well (B- range, I expect), not because I don't understand the material or because I am incapable of writing proofs, but because I have not had that much time to devote to it (as I am in the midst of a hectic term).

Now, I love pure math, and I don't think I can see the rest of my life without it. However, the process of learning it has been akin to learning a new language. I feel that with more time and practice, I will get the hang of it.

My question is: Am I fooling myself in thinking that I can achieve my dream? Is it possible that no amount of love and dedication to the craft will be enough, and that I am simply, as my advisor says, not talented?