Peter Woit's topcite list

  • Thread starter marcus
  • Start date
marcus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
24,712
783

Answers and Replies

josh1
It's worth mentioning that woit finds these results depressing.
 
marcus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
24,712
783
Peter's count makes it official, we have 3 winners of the forecast poll
Chronos, Gokul, and notevenwrong

https://www.physicsforums.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=917 [Broken]

These three guessed that there would be exactly 3 string papers that appeared in the past 5 years (2002-2006) which would get 100+ cites in 2006.
And that's what Peter's list shows

the three papers are
Berenstein et al http://arxiv.org/hep-th/0202021 [Broken] with 128

KKLT http://arxiv.org/hep-th/0301240 [Broken] with 238

Susskind http://arxiv.org/hep-th/0302219 [Broken] with 109

Here is the forecast poll thread with explanation of the question, and discussion:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=131433

I guess the way to put it in a nutshell is to recall that in year 2000 there were twenty-one recent stringy papers which got cited 100+ times in that year. By recent I mean appearing in the past five years (1996 - 2000).
Here's the link if anyone wants to check:
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/library/topcites/top40.2000.shtml

If you do the same count for 2006, then recent means (2002- 2006) and there were only three which made that mark.

My cordial thanks to Peter for having sifted thru the cites files to get final numbers for 2006. Spires has tended to be less forthcoming and a bit tardy with its results.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
josh1
These three guessed that there would be exactly 3 string papers that appeared in the past 5 years (2002-2006) which would get 100+ cites in 2006. And that's what Peter's list shows
What woit's list shows is that the view that string theory remains the only truly promising approach to physics beyond the standard model continues to prevail by a wide margin, the reason being that it is the only theory that includes all the properties that such a theory must have. However, it's good that there are some people willing to work on other ideas.
 
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
6,987
14
Is this the second time I've gotten incredibly lucky on one of your polls?! :bugeye:
 
josh1
Is this the second time I've gotten incredibly lucky on one of your polls?! :bugeye:
Since it was just luck and no money was involved it doesn't count, the lesson here being that next time, you should lie.
 
josh1
These three guessed that there would be exactly 3 string papers that appeared in the past 5 years (2002-2006) which would get 100+ cites in 2006. And that's what Peter's list shows
NO!!! That is not what peter's list shows. The exact quotation is:

peter woit said:
Overall, the list provides a very depressing view of the first six years of 21st century theoretical particle physics, with only eight post-2000 papers getting over 100 citations. These break up neatly into 4 hep-th string theory papers and 4 hep-ph phenomenology papers.
Thus his list pertains to all of particle physics, not just string theory, which, as peter's list shows, continues to utterly and completely dominate particle physics.
 

Related Threads for: Peter Woit's topcite list

Replies
29
Views
18K
Replies
24
Views
12K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
18
Views
5K
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
3K
Top