"Recent papers" discussion idea

[Martin]

If you want to do that, the most interesting paper in Friday's list is

arXiv:0711.2473, Parton Distributions for LO Generators, A. Sherstnev, R.S. Thorne

 

I think it would be great if people would throw into a common pot what new papers they find most interesting. This thread could work that way if D H wants. It already has kind of a cute title for such a thread and it is already started. So I would think serendipitous if DH says OK and we just keep going!

 

How about that DH? Your call, either way is fine.

[D H]

It's D H's thread. Maybe he would be happy if the thread evolved into a "interesting recent postings on arxiv" thread. If D H likes this, I think it would be great. If he doesn't like it and wants the thread to stay focused on Garrett Lisi's paper, that's fine too. We can start a recent-finds-on-arxiv thread some other time.

 

I think a recent-finds-on-arxiv thread is a great one. My only objection to making this thread the "recent-finds-on-arxiv thread" is the title of the thread itself. I can no longer change the title. If a moderator can change the title, go for it. Approval granted.

 

OTOH, if no one can change the thread title (or if the powers-that-be don't like the idea), I think it would better serve the forum to keep this thread to the original topic of Lisi's paper.

[Martin]

 

OTOH, if no one can change the thread title (or if the powers-that-be don't like the idea), I think it would better serve the forum to keep this thread to the original topic of Lisi's paper.

 

I don't qualify as "powers-that-be" but I like the idea of starting a new thread for recent finds, and keeping this thread for discussing the Garrett Lisi paper, titled as it is.

 

I hope that's what we do.

[swansont]

I've copied these posts over from the TEO thread, in case there were people who weren't following that.

 

I think it's a great idea; each paper should probably be in its own thread in the appropriate forum section. I would add this caveat: don't just link to a paper; I think there should be a summary that's boiled down so that someone not in that subfield can get a grip on the topic. Basically do the job (possibly better, though perhaps briefer) that the science reporter does when they present some new finding that's coming out in Science/Nature and it gets summarized for the masses. (Many of us cringe at those summaries, but physics people should be able to summarize physics articles without getting it wrong)