« first day (2313 days earlier)      last day (2602 days later) » 

10:00 PM
> In Genesis 1:6-8, we are told that one of God's first creations was a firmament in the heavens. This likely refers to the creation of the luminiferous aether.
 
"Despite a century of wasting billions of dollars in work on the theory, "No one knows how to solve completely the equations of general relativity that describe gravity; they are simply beyond current understanding."[28]"
 
lol, the viXra guy sounds a bit tinfoil-hat, sorry
 
@BenNiehoff It's easy to say that from an email account that can submit to arXiv
 
ok?
 
"The order created by God is on a foundation of uncertainty. The Book of Genesis explains that the world was an abyss of chaos at the moment of creation. Quantum mechanics is predicted in several additional respects by the Biblical scientific foreknowledge."
 
10:04 PM
Who here has a powerful server to test my code?
I need many threads
 
@EmilioPisanty I'm not reading this whole thing in detail, but after skimming through a bit, he seems super paranoid about plagiarism and establishing priority
I don't know of any examples in my field where such problems have occured
 
@BenNiehoff I would encourage you to read through the text in full
 
why?
I mean, out of all the things I could do with the time
 
@BenNiehoff because I think it does have arguments that cannot be dismissed easily
> For every author that submits to viXra there is a bunch of others who could make use of it but don't because they are put off by detractors who say that they will be labelled as cranks.
in particular
 
Why on earth are we talking about viXra again
 
10:08 PM
@BernardoMeurer 0celo7 brought it up
 
@EmilioPisanty And you bit the bait?
:P
 
@BernardoMeurer yeah, I'm weak that way
 
I dunno, that sentence isn't even grammatically correct...certainly contributes to the ranty nature of the post
 
But I do think the viXra-bashing goes way too far.
 
so then, how do you find a good paper on viXra?
 
10:09 PM
@BenNiehoff I'm not sure you can
 
then what use is it?
 
but I don't think bashing the medium is helpful
How many of the people that bash viXra have actually tried to browse it?
If they had, they'd find plenty of grounds for the bashing, but what does it say about folks that they don't look first?
 
I have looked, there's no need to assume I'm bashing it out of ignorance
 
@BenNiehoff I'm not
but I do see a lot of people that bash without looking
 
fine, but I don't think those people are here
 
10:14 PM
@BenNiehoff yah, well
'nnyways
 
so yeah, I know sometimes crackpots can be right...but it seems like a crapshoot
 
if you're bashing viXra and you can't fill in George R____, then you're talking out of prejudice.
 
Martin!
 
also, some people who did real physics and got a Nobel prize for it, afterwards become crackpots :P
 
@BenNiehoff it's not "crackpots can be right"
 
10:15 PM
sure it is, that was literally one of the arguments given in the post you linked
 
it's "non-crackpots can sometimes have a really hard time finding any conventional venue at all"
 
I don't see what's so onerous about requiring a trusted person in the field to vouch for you
 
I usually post my crackpottery here in PSE
 
@BenNiehoff that's because you haven't tried
 
generally the only people who are going to make meaningful contributions to, say, hep-th, are people who were previous affiliated and then left for industry
 
10:17 PM
@BernardoMeurer nope, have a look
 
@EmilioPisanty Those seem like serious papers at a glance, am I right to assume this?
 
@BernardoMeurer The George R ones or the others?
 
Yeah, the ones by Rajna
 
whos Rajna anyway?
is he famous or something?
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform what
 
10:19 PM
@AccidentalFourierTransform he's a... prolific author? I'd guess you'd call him
 
@ACuriousMind you are
admit it
youre very cold and distant lately
 
Why would I? Last time I talked to you I told you about anomaly polynomials, doesn't reek of being mad to me :P
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform You are right, he hasn't kissed me at all lately
 
@EmilioPisanty never heard of him :-/
 
@BenNiehoff For an outsider, the roadmap kind of looks like this
@AccidentalFourierTransform have a look on vixra/quant-ph
 
10:22 PM
@EmilioPisanty NOPE NOPE NOPE. I opened up the first paper and it was written in Word
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform I only said he was prolific
 
@EmilioPisanty That looks totally reasonable to me
 
@BenNiehoff reasonable, yes. Simple, no.
Thing is, if you're an outsider, you only get one shot.
 
That's not at all how it works
 
sorry, no. Just one more crackpot
 
10:24 PM
@AccidentalFourierTransform took you pretty long to figure out.
 
if you expect to write up a paper on a brilliant theory, email it to someone, and have them care, no, that's not how it works
 
@BenNiehoff so...
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform that's a fantastic gif
where's it from?
 
If you can't name 5-6 seminal papers on your topic and 20-30 references that are relevant to your work and not written by you, then it's quite unlikely you know what you're doing
 
10:25 PM
@BenNiehoff sure
 
idk, I found it online but I love it :D
 
but how does one go about obtaining an arXiv endorsement?
and what does one do if no one replies?
 
honestly, you had better know someone in person
you need to take the time to build a relationship
not spray emails and hope someone endorses you
 
suck it up and abandon the piece?
@BenNiehoff so... just those in the ivory tower get to ivorytowerize?
 
a decent project probably took you 8-12 months to finish, during that time you should probably have been in communication with people who know the topic
 
10:27 PM
you just send a letter to Hardy
 
or that
it helps to be unnaturally brilliant in that case
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform and hope that Hardy, unless all modern PIs, doesn't get dozens such emails per week
 
also let's not forgot Bose who would be unknown if not for sending a letter to Einstein
 
Ramanujan is just one more crackpot
if he was alive today, he would publish on vixra
 
@BenNiehoff you probably have, but there's no guarantee those people are endorsers
 
10:28 PM
ok, fine, but they surely know people as well
 
@BenNiehoff "surely they know people" is more ivorytowerese
 
most active people are endorsers, I think if you submit like 3 papers a year to a given topic, you'll maintain endorser status
 
It's the inbuilt assumption that if you're doing something worthwhile then you're already in the club.
 
another thing worth pointing out:
people don't just jump into the field working on the most important problems
you do smaller things, develop skills, build your way up to more interesting things
so yes, I'd be suspicious of some totally unknown person saying they'd solved a Millenium Prize problem...where is this person's other work?
 
10:34 PM
@BenNiehoff desk-rejected from journals because they had the wrong email address?
@BenNiehoff Put it another way: academia is meant to be a meritocracy, not a who-you-know-acy. Getting people to listen is already hard enough, without putting up actual signs that say Unaffiliated Need Not Apply.
 
rejected from Nature, maybe, but there are other journals which are meant for more mundane work
 
@BenNiehoff and you're dead sure that none of the journals you read will desk-reject a legitimate paper just because the author has no affiliation?
 
seems unlikely
unless it is written in word
fuck that
 
so, explain how someone might develop the necessary skills to solve something like the Hodge conjecture, while managing to have absolutely zero contact with academia up until they finish their manuscript?
seriously
many journals accept submissions in Word...in topics like biology and social sciences
 
then f* biology and ss :-P
 
10:38 PM
@BenNiehoff It's not so much that they're posting solutions to high-flying problems
It's the problems on the road
 
@AccidentalFourierTransform I once saw a PDF from a philosophy journal whose title was written in Papyrus.
 
OH NO GOD NO
3
 
at least it wasn't the whole abstract :D
 
whats wrong with people, honestly
 
ooh, how about starting every section with a big, illuminated Papyrus capital
 
10:41 PM
I will publish all my papers in Comic Sans
The abstract will be in webdings, because I'm meta
 
or using mathfrak for plain text
 
but then you have to write in German
and go back to 1932
 
I do like Comic Neue for presentations
it's gotten a few weird looks but they were totes worth it
 
I'll be honest
I liked comic sans as a kid
 
10:45 PM
@BernardoMeurer you're not being fully honest
 
in your innermost self, you still like comic sans
 
I liked it until about 5 years ago
I feel like deep down we all love comic sans
but we all also know it's horrible
so we're ashamed of it
which is why people react so strongly to comic sans
Because it's a constant reminder of our inner inconsistencies and incoherencies
I'm basically the new Freud
4
 
thats deep bro
 
@EmilioPisanty I've seen maybe 20 papers from there. One of which quoted John Duffield. It's trash
And I don't know who that guy is
If you can show that >50% of the papers aren't garbage, ok. But I'm very sure that's not true
 
10:58 PM
kbye
 
cya
 
@ACuriousMind my birthday wish to you is no longer on the star board
sory
 
Well, my birthday is over, so that's not too sad
 
Happy birthday.
 
@ACuriousMind What do you think about $$\bigg\lmoustache_a^b f'(x)\, dx=f(b)-f(a)?$$
 
11:04 PM
\lmoustache ???
 
Yeah, check it out
I really like it
 
$\lgoatee$
:(
 
:P
did you turn on TeX?
How do you like that integral
 
The spacing of the limits is odd
 
$${\huge\lmoustache}_a^b f'(x)$$
hmm
@ACuriousMind do you know how to put text above and under a symbol?
 
11:08 PM
@0celo7 You have to declare it with \DeclareMathOperator*, see tex.stackexchange.com/a/100912/71716
 
$$\bigg\lmoustache_{\quad a}^{\quad b}\quad f(x)\,\mathfrak dx.$$
@ACuriousMind ^ ?
 
I'm just trying new notation
 
Why did you put so much space there
 
$${}_a{}^b\bigg\lmoustache$$
@ACuriousMind To see if it looks good
If I do $$\bigg\lmoustache_{[a,b]}f(x)\,\eth x.$$
@ACuriousMind ?
 
11:14 PM
Still too much space between the moustache and the subscript, I think
Also, why is your d mutating? :P
 
$$\bigg\lmoustache_{\!\![a,b]}$$
@ACuriousMind ?
@ACuriousMind oh, no reason
I think the moustache looks more like an integral than $\int$ does
$\int$ reminds me of a monkey swinging through the jungle
$$\bigg\lmoustache_{\! a}^b\,f(x)\,\mu(\mathrm d x).$$
@ACuriousMind Ok, how about now?
I should go through PSE and make sure people are using this new integral.
 
@0celo7 better
 
@ACuriousMind Although $\mu(\mathrm dx)$ is pretty awful notation
$\mathrm d\mu(x)$ is nice
I think it's supposed to suggest you're measuring $\mathrm dx$
 
11:36 PM
Just write it as a function
$\int (a, b, f, \mu)$
 
$$\bigg\lmoustache_{\!\sigma}^\oplus \mathscr H_\lambda\,\mathrm d\mu(\lambda)$$
Argh!
@Slereah $\mathrm{Int}(a,b,f,\mu)$.
I wonder how that looks in latex
 
$$\text{Int}: \Bbb R \times \Bbb R \times L^1 \times M \to \Bbb R$$
What is the space of all measures
 
@Slereah see Halmos
 
I mean the symbol
 
he studies the space of all measures at certain points
@Slereah umm
@Slereah I think it's just $M$ in Yosida
 
11:42 PM
Oh, I was right then
 
@ACuriousMind Rebecca can't do the robot test. I think she's an AI. What's a fool-proof method for finding out?
 
Voight-Kampff test
 
@Slereah btw the space of all measures is a Banach space
 
what is the norm of a measure
 
Its variation
 
11:45 PM
What if it's not finite
 
Oh, the variation is always finite
It's a very hard theorem
Oh, it needs to be a finite measure :P
 
Wouldn't the variation of the Lebesgue measure on $\Bbb R$ be infinite?
 
So it's the Banach space of finite measures
 
boring
 
@Slereah not for probability!
that's your favorite field, no?
 
11:48 PM
oh my gosh
 
No :(
 
i just asked a question on SO
 
SO(n)???
 
Also some probabilities aren't of finite variation!
 
and there are already four questions ahead of it, and that's just in the python tag...
how? i don't understand
 
11:49 PM
other people posted questions
@Slereah Hmm? A probability measure is positive and finite.
 
Lemme check
I recall some probability measure of finite mean but infinite variation
 
@0celo7 no, I know
 
I don't think the variation is too interesting if you have a sigma algebra
 
it's just I'm surprised how many are posted in such a short space of time
 
@Slereah Variation ~= variance
 
11:51 PM
o
Ah, found it
Variable aléatoire à densité ayant une espérance mais n'ayant pas de variance
The PDF is $$f(t) = \frac{2}{1 + t^3}$$
For $t \geq 0$
$$\int f(t) dt = 1,\ \int t f(t) dt = 1,\ \int t^2 f(t) dt = \infty$$
 
crazy
 
It's in my big book of counterexamples
It's a fun book
 
wonder if oxtoby is on sale
 
Apparently in the trivial topology all sequences converge to all points
Quite messy
It's a bit disorienting to read math in another language when you only read it in another
 

« first day (2313 days earlier)      last day (2602 days later) »