Share good ideas and conversation.   Login, Join Us, or Take a Tour!
comment by Devac
Devac  ·  53 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: The Peculiar Math That Could Underlie the Laws of Nature

E8-based theories are resurfacing once again! Has it already been ~3 years since the last time it got in the media? ;)

I should probably look into it – at any real length – at some point. Also, it's refreshing to see people being careful about implying/stating the connection with string theory.

    But in another new paper that’s now circulating among experts and under review by Physical Letters B

Isn't making it public against the rules of peer review?




am_Unition  ·  52 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    Isn't making it public against the rules of peer review?

Not explicitly. Some journals have rules or guidelines against that sort of thing, but they're not always strictly enforced.

In my own experience, sometimes you're better off leaking the information into the public domain so that your field can progress as quickly as possible. And to establish precedence, of course. Especially if you've got research that you know is important, but your reviewers keep striking it down for possibly political reasons, you're going to feel more than entitled to put a previously rejected version of your manuscript on arXiv or send something out to other leaders in your discipline.

It's a terribly grey area that has been substantially muddied by the internet disrupting traditional publishing standards.

Devac  ·  52 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Interesting. The more I hear about it, the more I feel like publishing world is basically House of Cards with fewer one-liners and more cynicism.

More about the theory from the article: I'm slowly progressing through Furey's PhD thesis (here if you are interested) to get a better picture of ideas from her articles. It's not exactly my forte, but what I read and, as a subset of it, understood so far has convinced me to retract my initial snark. Dunno if I'll be able to give any cogent critique anytime soon, but who knows. Since I work night shifts as basically a motion detector, I might as well try to crunch it.

Yey for physics degree! ;/

am_Unition  ·  52 days ago  ·  link  ·  

You've got a better shot at putting together a cogent critique than I do. It'd probably take me about about 18 months to get up to speed on the mathematics. And my advisors would be pissed about the cut it'd take out of my productivity for them.

    Since I work night shifts as basically a motion detector, I might as well try to crunch it.

    Yey for physics degree!

Sounds like you're a very expensive motion detector! I'm sure you get payed SO MUCH. But seriously, it's weird how the compensation for physicists is almost binary, or some sort of a Heaviside/step function right at the boundary of a PhD. Institutionalized scam or indentured servitude? I never can decide.

Devac  ·  52 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Then I'm recommending Group Theory in Physics by J.F. Cornwell for when you'll find that elusive 'free time' people bring up. It's three volumes, 1st one is a solid introduction to the 'slightly more formal group theory'. There's also some abridged version that picks only the meaty bits out of vol 1 and 2 which I found as a handy reference for most of the courses with 'quantum' in the name.

    Sounds like you're a very expensive motion detector!

It's a living. I get money for sitting with a choice between being idle or working on my stuff. Could have turned out a lot worse.

Really, the main reason for my butthurt is the number of rejections. You'd think that after 21 technical interviews I'd get something because of human error if nothing else. Doesn't help that the main insight I got from people boils down to either having no skills to speak of or possessing the least compatible personality since the times of pharaoh Assholetep.

am_Unition  ·  52 days ago  ·  link  ·  

You have recommended a book so obscure that I cannot find any reviews for it, on any platform. I'm more than a little impressed. Thank you :).

    You'd think that after 21 technical interviews I'd get something because of human error if nothing else. Doesn't help that the main insight I got from people boils down to either having no skills to speak of or possessing the least compatible personality since the times of pharaoh Assholetep.

Did I... miss this update? Is there like a Pubski post you made or something? Yeah, "no skills", you're only a budding physicist-mathematician that operates at a level far beyond their age. Do you think you're overly intimidating your interviewers? Maybe they think that you're going to take their jobs out from under them? Because there's absolutely no way that your IRL personality is that dismal. After seeing you interact for 2+ years here, you play nice plenty of the time. Like almost all of it, 'cept when people are asking for it. I'm at maximum perplexion on this one.

Fuck it though, I hope you keep striking out so I can hire you someday, lolz (/s)! Not that I think you couldn't do my future job better than me, I'm just not terribly afraid of the prospect. Then you can hire me! Maybe.

Dala  ·  51 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Just remember, Einstein had trouble getting a job in his field and ended up working as a patent clerk and it afforded him the time to work on whatever he wanted and look where that got us. ;)