my question was simply regarding the academic strengths of some maths departments of the "top" (as judged by me, going by the strength of modules offered) universities in uk & usa. ceteris paribus (holding other factors constant) which were the better ones?
yet mr dfranlin tries to come off as a "smart alec" if i may say so, by introducing other factors. why do you even need to introduce other factors?
i think i also stated my opinion based on findings of this topic. i also am open to suggestions that claim otherwise. i also need evidence to back those claims up. however other than derisory comments from dranklin or spencer.smith or the likes, i don't get much substance of worth. i wonder what's wrong with these pre-pubescent pre-uni students?
alice_t however provided a somewhat tangential but nice and well roudned reply. hats off to her(?) for that.
cheers mate