The discussion revolves around a student's concerns about their potential in pure mathematics following discouraging feedback from their advisor. The student is contemplating whether to persist in pursuing a PhD in pure math despite feeling a strong passion for the subject, while also considering the implications of their academic performance and the advisor's suggestion to focus on applied math or physics instead.
Participants express a range of views on the importance of talent versus persistence, with no clear consensus on whether the student's academic performance is adequate for pursuing pure math. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best path forward for the student.
Some participants note that the student's performance may be affected by external factors, such as a hectic semester, which complicates the assessment of their potential in pure math. Additionally, the definitions of "talent" and "success" in mathematics are not universally agreed upon.
Please, there is a huge difference between applied, experimental, numerical and mathematical physics. Same as how there is a big gap between applied and pure maths, the difference between mathematical physics and the corresponding mathematical focuses is razor thin.mordechai9 said:the average physicist