FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » UberGeek : WolframAlpha SearchEngine

   
Author Topic: UberGeek : WolframAlpha SearchEngine
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
Hokay, the stuff I post on this thread probably ain't gonna be of interest to most. But often stumbling over stuff that tickles my fancy, and on the off chance that somebody else might find them to be worthy...

Science's humorous look at their new requirement that coauthors actually list who did what in papers submitted for publication.
(Ya might hafta click to expand the first link)
And a PDF of an interview with Smalley on his discovery of buckeyballs and other things, which brought a smile to my face.

[ May 02, 2009, 06:37 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]

Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Audeo
Member
Member # 5130

 - posted      Profile for Audeo   Email Audeo         Edit/Delete Post 
I think the new coauthors idea is interesting, if perhaps ill-concieved. Rather than forcing each coauthor to write little editorials in the margin, they should have an appendix after the works cited that states the major role of each co-author. As it is you have to know the code to decipher which author actually had an effect on the project. Occasionally they will indicate who is the lead researcher, and with some inside knowledge on the informal rules you can figure out the relative importance of the other authors. But a little key or something to show who was just a consultant, who had the major idea, who did the grunt work, and who supplied lab space would give the reader a better idea. I have a feeling that if they worked out a list of such titles the authors would work out an heirarchical code (similar to the inoccous list that is used now) that more precisely, but not less obscurely, informed the reader of who did what.
Posts: 349 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Primal Curve
Member
Member # 3587

 - posted      Profile for Primal Curve           Edit/Delete Post 
I'm sorry, but I just can't take this thread's geek status seriously with a serious lack of umlaut.

Über-geek, my friend Über-geek.

Posts: 4753 | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cheiros do ender
Member
Member # 8849

 - posted      Profile for cheiros do ender   Email cheiros do ender         Edit/Delete Post 
It's not about the scientist(S), it's about the science. So this idea in regard to coauthorship, IMO, is completely stupid.
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
So this idea in regard to coauthorship, IMO, is completely stupid.
Why?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cheiros do ender
Member
Member # 8849

 - posted      Profile for cheiros do ender   Email cheiros do ender         Edit/Delete Post 
Why does it matter so much who wrote this particular article in such detail? That's just a matter of fame grabbing. A scientist should write an article for the betterment of science, not for measurable personal glory. They should keep it like it is. That way, the more experienced of the two can be credited for being in charge of said project, and the more amateur one gets credit for working on the project at all. But then, why else would two scientists want to coauthor a publication? It's just nonsense.

$0.02AU

Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
A scientist should write an article for the betterment of science, not for measurable personal glory.
You're right. It's silly for artists to sign their paintings, too, and for authors to insist on copyrights. And the whole idea of two or more scientists cooperating is just ridiculous.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
That's a deliberate "mistake", Primal Curve. The UBB authors change the coding for special characters everytime they muck with the forum program. So using the umlat would just make the word unreadable in the future.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
A large PDF on the use of compost in Cow Power production.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
HollowEarth
Member
Member # 2586

 - posted      Profile for HollowEarth   Email HollowEarth         Edit/Delete Post 
How to tell what each author did.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
Big stars are such divas. It really ain't over until the fat lady sings.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
NASA's 181 Things to Do on the Moon. And they don't even mention the interesting things to do: like raquetball when most people can jump 10feet/3metres off the floor*, and good players should be able to touch the 20foot/3metre ceiling.

* With the legs still fully extended downward

[ February 07, 2007, 02:39 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]

Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
Easy enough, Ill take a page from some modern translations of the Bible where they change the text color to red every time Jesus is actually speaking.

So on the reports require each author to select a color and stick with it throughout the entire paper. Then we know exactly who said what, and who should get credit.

I kinda like the co author idea though, its more honest.

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
Not sure how y'd color code when most ideas are bounced around the team. Refereeing credit for how each individual contributed would require 24hour audio-video monitoring of every team member.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by aspectre:
Not sure how y'd color code when most ideas are bounced around the team. Refereeing credit for how each individual contributed would require 24hour audio-video monitoring of every team member.

Not necessarily, somebody writes it all up, and all the scientists review it before its published. There would have to be a consensus on who said what before publication.

I do think there are kinks I'd need to work out before I could seriously suggest this idea.

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
That would work real well in particle physics where a paper might have 300 authors. Tell you what, people, suppose you work in the field for a bit and get an idea of what the current status is before you try coming up with improvements?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ethics Gradient
Member
Member # 878

 - posted      Profile for Ethics Gradient   Email Ethics Gradient         Edit/Delete Post 
Why bother, KoM? Just make all of them use those 6 minute block timesheets that lawyers use to calculate the hours to bill clients...

[Wink]

Posts: 2945 | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Shigosei
Member
Member # 3831

 - posted      Profile for Shigosei   Email Shigosei         Edit/Delete Post 
Authorship of scientific papers doesn't necessarily mean you actually did any of the writing or even contributed significant ideas. The order of the names has a lot more to do with the amount people have contributed to the project. (My name is on the paper linked in this post largely due to the data collection and analysis that I did. I wasn't involved in much of the planning or drawing conclusions stages).

I think PNAS might already have similar requirements in effect. When the lab I worked for submitted a paper, there was a bit at the end about who did what. Here's the abstract. Note that there are only two people who actually wrote the paper, despite the long list of names (those two are the professor and the lead graduate student on the project). Some of the people on that list were peripherally involved, and I don't know how many (particularly some of the undergraduates) would have been able to provide much in the way of commentary.

So the colored text wouldn't be helpful, since the writing isn't the main reason you get your name on a paper. Additionally, it is rare to have just one author; collaboration aside, there are many people in the lab who contribute to the success of the project, and it's quite fair that they get recognition for that. As for doing it out of the goodness of your heart, rather for credit, keep in mind that prestige and reputation in one's field is important and is generally required to get good research positions and grants. Asking a scientist to do science without recognition is almost like asking someone to work for free.

Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
HollowEarth
Member
Member # 2586

 - posted      Profile for HollowEarth   Email HollowEarth         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by cheiros do ender:
Why does it matter so much who wrote this particular article in such detail? That's just a matter of fame grabbing. A scientist should write an article for the betterment of science, not for measurable personal glory. They should keep it like it is. That way, the more experienced of the two can be credited for being in charge of said project, and the more amateur one gets credit for working on the project at all. But then, why else would two scientists want to coauthor a publication? It's just nonsense.

$0.02AU

Right, it just so happens that unlike in your dreams, everyone has to eat, and most of us happen to like to live indoors. So no. (Here is a response to a similar bit of nonsense.)

And to the idea of color coding, if it were that simple it would already be done that way.

Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
Animated PaleoMaps showing how the Earth looks through the geological ages.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
Ride D-Wave
"It probably won't work but it's not quixotic," says Seth*Lloyd of MIT. "If it works then they can solve really hard problems and they'll be very much in demand...not the kind of company I'd invest my money in."
D-Wave Chief Executive Herb Martin...said...the evidence...indicates that the device is performing quantum computations, but he acknowledged there is some uncertainty.

* I believe he's the originator of much of the work that D-Wave is based upon. If not, the MIT researcher who is said much the same upon hearing of D-Wave's planned demonstration.

Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
So why did it take me so long to stumble over the LorentzInvariance limit on QuantumFoam?
It shoulda been a MAJOR headline.

Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
From the makers of Mathematica, the really different WolframAlpha searchengine.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
aspectre
Member
Member # 2222

 - posted      Profile for aspectre           Edit/Delete Post 
The older accelerated twin.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2