jornal for speculative research, a new idea [Archive]

Alejandro

Nov14-04, 07:07 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>I noticed that for some time Kluwer held a journal for\nspeculations in science,\nhttp://www.kluweronline.com/issn/0155-7785/contents\nIt was discontinued in 1998. It is clear that peer-review does\nnot mix with such line of publications...\n\nNow, evolving in the new ArXiv policy, I have though: what about a\n"credit policy" for authors, based in standard publications. For\ninstance publication in PhysRev, Phys Rev letters etc could score\n"credits" for the authors, perhaps proportionally to the impact factor\nof the journal, and thet would be free either to use directly such\ncredits as "pages" in the speculative journal, or to donate their\ncredits to other authors.\n\nWhat do you think? Should you read such journal, or ask to the library\nto subscribe to it?\n\nAs an extra possibility, the credit donation mechanism would be\nanonymous for anonymous authors, and explicit for real authors. So one\ncan cover its identity by "doning" to, say, N. Bourbaki. Or to back up\nwritting by other people even if you are not directly involved.\n\nIf you think about, it is a kind of peer-reviewed unrefeered journal\n:-)\n\nAlejandro Rivero\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>I noticed that for some time Kluwer held a journal for
speculations in science,
http://www.kluweronline.com/issn/0155-7785/contents
It was discontinued in 1998. It is clear that peer-review does
not mix with such line of publications...

Now, evolving in the new ArXiv policy, I have though: what about a
"credit policy" for authors, based in standard publications. For
instance publication in PhysRev, Phys Rev letters etc could score
"credits" for the authors, perhaps proportionally to the impact factor
of the journal, and thet would be free either to use directly such
credits as "pages" in the speculative journal, or to donate their
credits to other authors.

What do you think? Should you read such journal, or ask to the library
to subscribe to it?

As an extra possibility, the credit donation mechanism would be
anonymous for anonymous authors, and explicit for real authors. So one
can cover its identity by "doning" to, say, N. Bourbaki. Or to back up
writting by other people even if you are not directly involved.

If you think about, it is a kind of peer-reviewed unrefeered journal
:-)

Alejandro Rivero

Cl.Massé

Nov16-04, 02:17 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>"Alejandro" <arivero@posta.unizar.es> a écrit dans le message de\nnews:1d8a7d98.0411131259.535d0e63@posting.goog le.com...\n\n> Now, evolving in the new ArXiv policy, I have though: what about a\n> "credit policy" for authors, based in standard publications. For\n> instance publication in PhysRev, Phys Rev letters etc could score\n> "credits" for the authors, perhaps proportionally to the impact factor\n> of the journal, and thet would be free either to use directly such\n> credits as "pages" in the speculative journal, or to donate their\n> credits to other authors.\n\nIt\'s not from such authors that I\'d like to read speculative papers.\nSpeculation is worth in difficult fields, not in paper producing ones.\n\n--\n~~~~ clmasse on free dot F-country\nLiberty, Equality, Profitability.\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>"Alejandro" <arivero@posta.unizar.es> a écrit dans le message de
news:1d8a7d98.0411131259.535d0e63@posting.google.c om...

> Now, evolving in the new ArXiv policy, I have though: what about a
> "credit policy" for authors, based in standard publications. For
> instance publication in PhysRev, Phys Rev letters etc could score
> "credits" for the authors, perhaps proportionally to the impact factor
> of the journal, and thet would be free either to use directly such
> credits as "pages" in the speculative journal, or to donate their
> credits to other authors.

It's not from such authors that I'd like to read speculative papers.
Speculation is worth in difficult fields, not in paper producing ones.

--
~~~~ clmasse on free dot F-country
Liberty, Equality, Profitability.

Doug Sweetser

Nov16-04, 02:56 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>\n\nHello Alejandro:\n\nI think the journal would fail because there is no demand for\nspeculative journals, as the Kluwer case shows. People are too busy to\nbother with speculation. Most speculative sites I have read don\'t have\nany math behind them, just big claims. Those with some math go from\ntrivial observations to unintelligible.\n\ndoug\nquaternions.com\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>Hello Alejandro:

I think the journal would fail because there is no demand for
speculative journals, as the Kluwer case shows. People are too busy to
bother with speculation. Most speculative sites I have read don't have
any math behind them, just big claims. Those with some math go from
trivial observations to unintelligible.

doug
quaternions.com

Binder

Nov17-04, 11:13 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>\n\n\n"Alejandro" <arivero@posta.unizar.es> wrote\n\n> As an extra possibility, the credit donation mechanism would be\n> anonymous for anonymous authors, and explicit for real authors. So one\n> can cover its identity by "doning" to, say, N. Bourbaki. Or to back up\n> writting by other people even if you are not directly involved.\n\nSpeculative physics is similar to science fiction and modern arts: often\nuseless, but highly important for inspirations.\n\n> If you think about, it is a kind of peer-reviewed unrefeered journal\n\nReferees should be there but act similar to art directors: not like killers\nor promoters, friendly guides in a strange/crazy world.\nMy desire: the contributions in such a journal should be short, forcing\nauthors to clean up and to focus onto the central message.\n\nBernd\n\n\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>"Alejandro" <arivero@posta.unizar.es> wrote

> As an extra possibility, the credit donation mechanism would be
> anonymous for anonymous authors, and explicit for real authors. So one
> can cover its identity by "doning" to, say, N. Bourbaki. Or to back up
> writting by other people even if you are not directly involved.

Speculative physics is similar to science fiction and modern arts: often
useless, but highly important for inspirations.

> If you think about, it is a kind of peer-reviewed unrefeered journal

Referees should be there but act similar to art directors: not like killers
or promoters, friendly guides in a strange/crazy world.
My desire: the contributions in such a journal should be short, forcing
authors to clean up and to focus onto the central message.

Bernd