Alejandro's new paper on the arxiv

  • Thread starter marcus
  • Start date
  • #1
marcus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
24,738
785
this just out

posted by one of our locals from the PF hood: arivero

Congratulations! Way to go!

part of the paper was first presented in a PF thread by arivero
or rather he explored the ideas here that then contributed to
developing the paper

http://arxiv.org/gr-qc/0404086 [Broken]
"Some minor examples on discrete geometry"
Alejandro Rivero
Tue, 20 Apr 2004
3 pages

Assuming a minimum value for area measurement, the emergence of quantum mechanics can be easily motivated from naive consideration of gravitational force. Here we provide some pedagogical examples and extensions.
At the same time, the role of Planck mass is shown to be of some theoretical influence even at low energies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
920
0
He even cites physicsforums in the references
And marcus, you are also cited in the text!
 
Last edited:
  • #3
marcus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
24,738
785
meteor said:
He even cites physicsforums in the references
And marcus, you are also cited in the text!
that was nice of him, I did not have anything to do with developing the ideas I just enjoyed them when they appeared on that thread. I will try to find the thread
 
  • #4
marcus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
24,738
785
it was Alejandro's "kepler length" thread

"kepler length"
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=14007

I think it has some of the same ideas as the paper

it begins with a kind of riddle, which I remember answering
(this displeased Alejandro, so he edited in some space so
that readers would not see the answer in the next post and so
they would have a chance to think about it for themselves: a good idea too)
 
  • #5
arivero
Gold Member
3,311
64
Yep, Marcus (et al), the note is a straight translation of two PF threads. While it is not high research, I thought that it was a interesting exchange, and not every gr-qc reader reads physicsforums.

And no, I was not displeased by your fast answer... Simply I understood that if you are living most of the internet here between PF and the arxiv, probably you were missing some old e-traditions about spoilers :-)

(I hope not to raise a bad precedent. If some "theory development" poster is tempted to go this way, let me note that only the http://arxiv.org/archive/physics was traditionally available for this purpose, all the others being banned)
 
  • #6
58
0
???

arivero said:
Yep, Marcus (et al), the note is a straight translation of two PF threads. While it is not high research, I thought that it was a interesting exchange, and not every gr-qc reader reads physicsforums.

And no, I was not displeased by your fast answer... Simply I understood that if you are living most of the internet here between PF and the arxiv, probably you were missing some old e-traditions about spoilers :-)

(I hope not to raise a bad precedent. If some "theory development" poster is tempted to go this way, let me note that only the http://arxiv.org/archive/physics was traditionally available for this purpose, all the others being banned)
I simply do not understand this last paragraph, perhaps because I do not read archive/physics. Does this means that /physics has different rules tradition or "culture" than /gr-qc or/quant-ph? If so, what is the difference? I am confused. TIA for enlightening me. Jim Graber
 
  • #7
arivero
Gold Member
3,311
64
jgraber said:
I simply do not understand this last paragraph, perhaps because I do not read archive/physics. Does this means that /physics has different rules tradition or "culture" than /gr-qc or/quant-ph? If so, what is the difference? I am confused. TIA for enlightening me. Jim Graber
Well, time ago before the "university affiliation" rule, very speculative or poor papers in the arxiv were detected and removed by hand. It seems that the admins felt no very good about doing this -it is a personal, referee like, criteria, after all-, so they decided to move them to /physics.general (denying crosspost at the same time, by the way) instead of plainly rejecting them.

While the new rules do not imply a continuity in this tradition, they seem to suggest that old posters of /physics will be still able to upload new papers to the .general area, and if they are given "endorser" status, they will also be able to authorize new users into this section of the arxiv. So one could expect the tradition to perpetuate, even if now it is not manually enforced anymore.
 
  • #8
58
0
Thanks, I had never heard any of that. Jim Graber
 

Related Threads on Alejandro's new paper on the arxiv

  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
42
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
Top