SelfAdjoint declared winner of first forecast poll

In summary, O. Lauscher and M. Reuter have published a paper in which they demonstrate that fractal spacetime exists and has an effective dimensionality of 2. They also make contact with recent Monte Carlo simulations. I predict that this paper will have 4-10 citations by yearend.
  • #1
marcus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
24,775
792
http://citebase.eprints.org/cgi-bin/citations?id=oai:arXiv.org:hep-th/0507235

sA predicted that Smolin "The Case for Background Independence" would garner 50-69 UK downloads thru end September 2005

that is essentially in the first two full months (aug and sept) that it was posted it would be downloaded by that many people from the UK mirror site (which is the only one that keeps count and publishes how many)

IT TURNED OUT so far THERE HAVE BEEN 57 UK downloads

sA was the only PF person who guessed the correct range, other people (I think we were 5 in all) guessed other things like "below 50" and "70-89"

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=83578

I think, if no one objects to my announcing a winner even tho it is not yet the end of the month, that there probably aren't going to be significantly more UK downloads, so sA gets the 3 cheers and the JimmytheGreek prize.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I don't know. It's not over until the fat lady with a computer sings. Think of all those British grad students jamming the lines on September 30 looking deparately for their next presentation topic.
 
  • #3
ohwilleke said:
I don't know. It's not over until the fat lady with a computer sings. Think of all those British grad students jamming the lines on September 30 looking deparately for their next presentation topic.

OK, it is not over till September 30. (I know enough to concede though)
 
  • #4
And what about the potential for cheating...
 
  • #5
Kea said:
And what about the potential for cheating...

it's all on the honor system, Kea
 
  • #6
BTW Ohwilleke, and Kea,

how many citations do you think this will have by yearend?

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0508202
Fractal Spacetime Structure in Asymptotically Safe Gravity
O. Lauscher, M. Reuter
20 pages

"Four-dimensional Quantum Einstein Gravity (QEG) is likely to be an asymptotically safe theory which is applicable at arbitrarily small distance scales. On sub-Planckian distances it predicts that spacetime is a fractal with an effective dimensionality of 2. The original argument leading to this result was based upon the anomalous dimension of Newton's constant. In the present paper we demonstrate that also the spectral dimension equals 2 microscopically, while it is equal to 4 on macroscopic scales. This result is an exact consequence of asymptotic safety and does not rely on any truncation. Contact is made with recent Monte Carlo simulations."

Right now it has only one citation. It was posted 26 August 2005, just a few days ago.

I expect it will have 4 citations by 31 December.
Maybe that just reflects the fact that I find the paper so interesting. I think one or both of you may also have commented to that effect, which is why this Reuter paper comes to mind.
 
  • #7
marcus said:
How many citations do you think this will have by yearend?

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0508202
Fractal Spacetime Structure in Asymptotically Safe Gravity
O. Lauscher, M. Reuter

Hi Marcus

I can't imagine how people estimate these things. I really have no idea: but for fun, I'll guess 10, because I like their work.

Kea :smile:
 
  • #8
Kea said:
Hi Marcus

I can't imagine how people estimate these things. I really have no idea: but for fun, I'll guess 10, because I like their work.

Kea :smile:

I like their work too a whole bunch. I will start a forecast poll thread. I think the choices will be

1 (which they have now)
2
3
4 (which I guess, that means three additional citations before yearend)
5
6
over 6 (that would include your guess of ten citations)
 
  • #9
marcus said:
BTW Ohwilleke, and Kea,

how many citations do you think this will have by yearend?

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0508202
Fractal Spacetime Structure in Asymptotically Safe Gravity
O. Lauscher, M. Reuter
20 pages

"Four-dimensional Quantum Einstein Gravity (QEG) is likely to be an asymptotically safe theory which is applicable at arbitrarily small distance scales. On sub-Planckian distances it predicts that spacetime is a fractal with an effective dimensionality of 2. The original argument leading to this result was based upon the anomalous dimension of Newton's constant. In the present paper we demonstrate that also the spectral dimension equals 2 microscopically, while it is equal to 4 on macroscopic scales. This result is an exact consequence of asymptotic safety and does not rely on any truncation. Contact is made with recent Monte Carlo simulations."

Right now it has only one citation. It was posted 26 August 2005, just a few days ago.

I expect it will have 4 citations by 31 December.
Maybe that just reflects the fact that I find the paper so interesting. I think one or both of you may also have commented to that effect, which is why this Reuter paper comes to mind.


He's giving a talk at loops 05 on essentially that topic, and there should be some schmoozing between his people, the CDT people, and anybody inspired by the occasion on it. Result, some new insights. Allow time for earliest publication, I say 2-3 cites by December 31. One of them a forehead smacker ("Why didn't we all see that?").
 
  • #10
selfAdjoint said:
He's giving a talk at loops 05 on essentially that topic, and there should be some schmoozing between his people, the CDT people, and anybody inspired by the occasion on it. Result, some new insights. Allow time for earliest publication, I say 2-3 cites by December 31. One of them a forehead smacker ("Why didn't we all see that?").

Hi sA, congratulations on an accurate forecast in the Smolin poll. I've made a new forecast poll for the Reuter and would welcome it if you would register your guess!
 
Last edited:
  • #11
I have friends in England. 10 days left in September?? Skewing the results is not beyond the realm of possibility... Alright already, I'm kidding.
 
  • #12
I think this poll (Smolin downloads) is essentially over and done with.
Y'all put your bets down on the Reuter cites poll

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=89854

Not so prone to skewing (even in imagination) because it is citations not downloads. someone would have to write scholarly papers to fudge the outcome
 
  • #13
Count me in for two citations for the fractal paper. I don't think that there are many people doing research that could easily cite it.
 
  • #14
ohwilleke said:
Count me in for two citations for the fractal paper. I don't think that there are many people doing research that could easily cite it.

Hi ohwilleke, please go to
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=756702
and click on the "2" button
that will register your forecast
(I can't do it for anyone, or would be glad to---the way it's set up only the person themselves can)
 
  • #15
ohwilleke said:
I don't know. It's not over until the fat lady with a computer sings. Think of all those British grad students jamming the lines on September 30 looking deparately for their next presentation topic.

I believe she has sung now.

It is September 30 and SELF-ADJOINT IS THE WINNER!

Good astute guess. The actual number turned out to be right in the middle of the range sA chose

He estimated Smolin's paper would get 50-69 hits on the UK arxiv mirror, and as of today it has received SIXTY (that is 60)

it also picked up 5 citations in the first two months it's been posted.

http://citebase.eprints.org/cgi-bin/citations?id=oai:arXiv.org:hep-th/0507235

the fifth citation came from a curious paper by Lucien Hardy
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0509120
Probability Theories with Dynamic Causal Structure: A New Framework for Quantum Gravity


Four others of us registered forecasts in the poll, to see the other guesses go here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=83578


----------------------

I would like to put in a plug for the ASHTEKAR AND BOJOWALD poll. So far 3 people have estimated the UK hits on their new paper by year-end and it would be nice to have a few more predictions.

The paper appeared 18 September and in the first 2 weeks of its public existence it got 18 hits (at the UK mirror) and 2 citations.

Please go here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=90199
and register how many hits you expect by year-end.
I think some people habitually guess better and I'm curious to know who of us does. Maybe it can be learned?

A curious thing is that the 3 people who already guessed in that poll (A & B hits by yearend) all made the same prediction!
All three of us predicted 60-79 hits. Incidentally that now seems to me clearly too optimistic---or I would call it that anyway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

What is the significance of "SelfAdjoint declared winner of first forecast poll"?

The statement "SelfAdjoint declared winner of first forecast poll" indicates that the individual known as SelfAdjoint has been designated as the winner of the first forecast poll. This means that, based on the data and predictions gathered in the poll, SelfAdjoint is the most likely candidate to win the forecasted event or competition.

Who is SelfAdjoint and why did they win the first forecast poll?

SelfAdjoint is an individual who participated in the first forecast poll. They were declared the winner because their predictions and data were the most accurate and aligned with the actual outcome of the forecasted event or competition.

What was the first forecast poll and how was it conducted?

The first forecast poll was a survey or study conducted to gather data and predictions about a specific event or competition. It was likely conducted using various methods such as online surveys, phone interviews, or in-person data collection. The purpose of the first forecast poll was to gather information and make predictions about the outcome of the event or competition.

What is the significance of the first forecast poll in the scientific community?

The first forecast poll is significant in the scientific community because it demonstrates the use of data and predictions to make informed decisions or forecasts. It also highlights the importance of accurate and reliable data collection and analysis in scientific studies and research.

Are there any limitations or potential biases in the results of the first forecast poll?

As with any scientific study or survey, there may be limitations or potential biases in the results of the first forecast poll. These could include sample size, selection bias, or errors in data collection or analysis. It is important to critically evaluate the results and consider these potential limitations when interpreting the findings.

Similar threads

  • Poll
August-September hits on Smolin latest
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
21
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top