What fields have the hardest papers to read?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Simfish
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fields Papers
AI Thread Summary
Tegmark's cosmology papers are noted for their readability, especially compared to older graduate-level astronomy textbooks. Most astronomy papers are accessible if one has a background in digital signal processing, despite some complex topics like radiation hydrodynamics being less relevant today. General relativity is identified as one of the hardest fields, with other challenging areas including quantum gravity, string theory, and the holographic principle. The discussion touches on the difficulty of understanding papers in various fields, with some humor about the complexity of certain topics. Overall, the conversation highlights the varying levels of accessibility in scientific literature across different disciplines.
Simfish
Gold Member
Messages
811
Reaction score
2
So, I've just come across some of Tegmark's cosmology papers, and they're surprisingly readable.

It seems that most astronomy papers are quite readable, assuming that your background includes digital signal processing. In fact, they're far more readable than most of the old graduate school astro textbooks (which cover topics like radiation hydrodynamics or orbit potential theory). Somehow, these obscure topics aren't the hottest part of astro research today.

I'm pretty sure that general relativity is the hardest field. But are there any other fields whose papers are hard to read? I do have to improve my Bayesian statistics knowledge, of course, but the Bayesian statistics in most astro papers isn't that deep.

I'm curious, since I want to know how much farther I have to go.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
To name a few:
Quantum Gravity.
String theory or QFT in curved space-times.
The Holographic Principle.
Neutron Star E.O.S., superfluidity, quark-degenerate matter, etc.
 
zhermes said:
To name a few:
Quantum Gravity.
String theory or QFT in curved space-times.
The Holographic Principle.
Neutron Star E.O.S., superfluidity, quark-degenerate matter, etc.

PFF, that one's easy. Assume what they're talking about is BS and it's a lot easier to read :biggrin:
 
zhermes said:
To name a few:
Quantum Gravity.
String theory or QFT in curved space-times.
The Holographic Principle.
Neutron Star E.O.S., superfluidity, quark-degenerate matter, etc.

Accretion induced collapse{ I was lost while reading through the paper though I managed to pick up few main points)
 
I'd have trouble with Russian Literature. (Then again, I don't speak Russian)
 
Stellar hydrodynamics is great fun if brain injury is not an issue..
 
I'm still trying to find a field where I can understand any of the papers.
 
Pengwuino said:
I'm still trying to find a field where I can understand any of the papers.

then that would be sales & marketing where the goal is to dumb things down to sell to the masses
 
Back
Top