ahmet

all i can see, there is acceptance of community. I mean that this was too much effective which is also the wrong thing to me.

what I want to underline is that since there are "truths" and even though we scientists are successfull to find / find out those "truths" , they will exist and be effective.The difference will just be that we will not be able to use those truths. I mean that even though we get agreements on something the truths exist in every process regerdless our convention.

So, I wonder (and also should express my surprise that ) the reason why when some effective/known people says something, others follow without questioning.

I think that Google was guilty regarding our local law.

(because it can easily accepted as "third eye" , it definitely follows people. And this is a guilt.)

On 8/6/2025 at 10:47 PM, joigus said:

Thank you for the pointers.

Things like ii

Gosh ,I believe it is nice reason to deal with such things if you have too much spare time and have no responsibility on how to spend it.

Hi,

as I said at another thread, almost (or already) all of the sources I have come across until now are telling how to reference with samples. But they can't or do not respond questions whether that would be required or not for specific cases.

More clearly I would ask a source which may respond my questions on referencing, but not to be expert on the issue or on the subject matter of this literature, I just want to make zero failure when I reference any source.

Thanks.

additional information: currently I do not want to attend any university MSc or PhD program. One member said that the kind of info I look for here would generally be provided at universities by training and as I said I do not want to enroll any program currently for this aim.

53 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Objectively, you're conflating philosophies with people.

Science doesn't care about people, a true (Scotsman) scientist doesn't care what a godophile say's, bc it's irrelevant to one's goal.

Policy has infected the religious philosophy, for much longer, so it's more difficult to understand.

Lets be specific rather than turning the discussion into even rather general stereotypes. 😇 (did you mean or attempt to mean somewhat related to for instance this sentence :" science does not deal with subjects, it deals with objects."

If yes, oh i did not ever know that 🤣😂)

The last sentence worths but not sufficient. Lets elaborate it.

7 hours ago, swansont said:

I really hope that this is a matter of a language/communication problem and not bigotry. Science’s function doesn’t include endorsing the latter

Why bigotry ?

Please accept it, it is reality.

Just a response to the title

To be objective i believe both sides may have failures. See what i opinionate.

There are many people ( ah ok. They call themself with scientist) where we currently do not have a solution for a problem, they say that the relevant case was not a problem (for instance being a queer)

To me such people are not or may be not the exact scientists as they deem themself.

And at the other side, i am afraid it should not be so easy to be a religious person. Such people may/should consider to take themself equal to another person. But this is not a case for every circumstance. ( for instance,imagine such a person; feels quite relief and prefers to remain irresponsible when he/she does the sin while he/she gets quite angry across another person for the same sin that that person does.)

On 5/12/2025 at 11:32 PM, CharonY said:

This is because you generally learn that during training, and the instructions usually assume as much. I.e. they are not supposed to be learning instructions

Why you don't prefer to give some references to respond my question in meaning a solution instead?

I myself do not want to take place in any of educational association of current system or at least i do not want this in my home country.

Note please i am polyglot, so maybe i should look for in other languages other than English if you mean that the guidance is not supported in English. I do not want to take education here further. Sorry.

As (of) i understand you advise me to enroll a MSc or PhD program in order to publish something.

I think i do not want it. Or at least i am not willing to do that as long as i am in my home country.

Anyway, i will presumably decide NOT to publish anything academic but i am sure this will not mean that i have not had great knowledge.

Maybe i should reject carrying out the forthcoming proposed review demands.

1 hour ago, CharonY said:

but more than that, you would have to dig B up and read whether what A cited (and you want to incorporate into your paper) is indeed what is in B. If it is, you cite B and not A.

hi again,

assume please, The A references an info which is a summary of more than three paragraph (A only mentions /uses titles available in this original info row to row from B)

then I would like to reuse that row to row version of info in my own article?

now which source should be referenced?

my guess: Again B. but again would like to be confirmed.

Thanks

one current problem: I find some guidances boring or not useful abit. Because the answers I look for are not available in those sources. They almost always tend to tell how to reference. not exactly from over real samples. so is there a source to read them with more pleasure.

lke the source responding such questions:

under assumption if the sentence in A is a quotation?

how many words (count) can appear in one referenced sentence or paragraph?

can we use a same reference consecutively more than two or three?

Thanks again.

7 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Yes, you are right, B would be the one to reference, but more than that, you would have to dig B up and read whether what A cited (and you want to incorporate into your paper) is indeed what is in B. If it is, you cite B and not A.

Sure!

yes, because we need to be also sure that the referenced information is original and so secure;right?

okay.

9 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Therefore, what you describe here should not happen. More importantly, in a paper you generally cite material either for background (i.e. in the introduction sections), methods, or discussion. The core element of your study are your results, which should be original.

I understand that you advise to always be sure about originality. I agree meanwhile.

Thanks

Hi,

I guess what or how it should be but would like to be confrmed,though.

assume please that an "A" sentence passes in an article and the author referenced this sentence from B article with [1].

then which source should be referenced? (I thought that B should be referenced.) but in case my prediction is right, will not be writing a paper so much easy? (especially the introduction part ) (simply copy some sentences as same as it is referenced in a paper or combine with just two papers' referenced sentences and add the new ideas, then your paper is almost ready?

if there is no problem until this point, now I can understand the reason whys;

generelly papers reference sections are so much wide.

and the rejection ratios are so much high.

Thank you very much. 

I feel myself very happy being corrected/confirmed about my prediction which I wrote in my paper but could not publish it.

I shall try to revise and resubmit. 

Thanks again. 

5 minutes ago, MigL said:

Have you heard of 'noise cancelling' headphones ?
They modify the sound waves coming into your ears by introducing more sounds which destructively interfere with the noise waves you want 'cancelled'.

Hello,

I have not heard that term in meaning of developmental technology. But.. maybe I may predict what it was related...

for instance, is that related to some other external contexts like: subliminal & supraliminal stimuli.

But you are right that I definitely & specfically consider sound waves. 

Thank you for contribution. 

7 minutes ago, MigL said:

They modify the sound waves coming into your ears by introducing more sounds which destructively interfere with the noise waves you want 'cancelled'.

no, I read once again and decided that this kind of thing was new to me. 

Hi, 

I mean whether we could interfere them via setting their amplitude and/or wavelenght quantities by functions' rules. 

for instance, are the amplitude or wavelength of waves' are settable in the conformity of f(x)= Ax +B (This is a general rule of linear function as you know)

Thanks.

thank you for the explanations. I just googled what I see as an error on my tex maker editor, and followed what others say.

see here: https://latex.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=29957

hi,

I need a free latex editor. In previous times, I was using TeX maker but these days it seems it is not possible to use this one. (Windovs security prevents some settings or the editor itself does not work as same as it needed/predicted.)

Could someone help me please which editors are available? (and tutorial for construction)

On 3/12/2022 at 5:29 AM, Trurl said:

These are the best explanations I have found so far. It is enough to get started. I still don’t understand the displacement of Prime numbers as it relates to the zeta function.

 

I tried to particularly overview the thread but did not understand what you want. 

As far as I remember , Riemann's zeta function is

[math]  \frac{1}{n^\alpha}[/math] 

in mathematics , I also remember that we analyzed where it was convergent and divergent. 

May I ask you to provide your question in the most succint and sufficient form?

Thanks

On 2/13/2024 at 1:58 AM, swansont said:

A lot of people in science feel an obligation to review articles because others review their submissions. Even if the article is rejected, somebody spent time on it. The system doesn't work if people shirk their responsibilities.

But if you feel it’s not something you can do, because you’re not familiar enough with the material, you should say no.

That’s basically what I did. The community of my sort of physics was pretty small at that time; there weren’t six degrees of freedom. It was more like two or maybe three.

1)

On 2/12/2024 at 8:43 PM, CharonY said:

Generally speaking, if you have not been successfully through the peer-review process, it is not ideal to agree to write a review. It is time-consuming especially if you are not familiar with the literature in the field. 

 

If you mean to say what benefits you will have: none. Peer-review is a free service provided by scholars. I also do not want to be mean, but your writing is sometimes difficult to understand. A review written with similar issues would unfortunately not be helpful.

2)

Hi again, the journal has sent me a new manuscript again for evaluation. Two points:

From what I understood by CharonY & swansont's comments under this thread (appears above)

1) There is no benefit for me according to CharonY but

2) in spite of this it is understandable that swansont seems like encouraging.

Two questions:

1) show me please a logic reason on why to conduct a review (even if I have no benefit) ?

2) swansont, as expressed your comment seems encouraging, but why? (Please pay attention to CharonY's opinion too)

Thanks

external question:  Are reviewers responsible for unexpected but probable circumstances such as:

-- >> in case an article they handle contains copyright issue or plagiarised material (This is just an assumption)?

what you ask is not understandable in the thread text. But to reply just to the title, that is not the doable thing in my prediction or seems like an invalid /unapplicable question. Because the golde ratio is a number. 

and the curve you shown is a type of gaussian distribution function. (I presume it is NORMAL distribution function graph)

the journal which I successfully conducted a review returned me an acknowledgement with additional kind invitation as to express that they would like to see me again in the future as also an author . But I do not mind really. why to do that ?

First, I have already regular job (but this is not thoroughly an academic position really) and I believe I will have no earnings. So, why to bother myself,why ?

that is ok that I accept I deal with science and I sometimes believe I have found some very sensitive and really effective things/results for community (by community I both mean folks (big data) and scientists. (because scientists are also member of folks)

but why to bother myself ? for what ? for which aim?

will I have a benefit? no. 

because, I left formal academic life more than 7 years ago. I am still young or feel so, but really not willing to follow all the expectations (especially for zero benefit) 

What I do ?

I currently deal with only patents.

Anyway, I believe I am right but wonder if there is suitable and significantly meaningful & understandable critiques. Note please as I have no plan to enroll currently to a PhD and MSc program in my home country,I do not look for advices, but critiques are welcome. 

Sincerely,

ahmet

hi, 

this is a portative  dental instrument and I am not willing to share any else information unfortunately. sorry for this case. 

if possible, could someone please give me an idea, on how much money should I want for licensing in case I get in touch with some corporations?

hi, I completed the review, and may anyone explain whether I could share my recognition of reviewer certificate wherever I want?

On 2/15/2024 at 11:41 PM, joigus said:

Oh I get it. Is it 'beautiful', 'praised', 'commendable'? I've read different translations.

you can consider every aspect of beuty really.

so, all of them.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

What do you mean by steady?

Not affected by outside influences?

I might have used wrong term here, not sure.

by steady I mean the strong effect as a force across radiation ( when that metals are exposed to alpha, betta , gamma radiation)