Re:Problems with Eric Weinstein's “Geometric Unity”
by ummonk on Saturday March 06, 2021 @06:22PM
(#26371467)
Notably, it is not uncommon for math and physics researchers to bypass journals as a gatekeeper and directly publish to arXiv. This still allows for other researchers to see the claims presented in a rigorous format and rebut them.
Re:Problems with Eric Weinstein's “Geometric Unity”
by woopwoop on Saturday March 06, 2021 @06:38PM
(#26371574)
It's pretty uncommon (read: I've literally never heard of this outside of one obvious famous exception) for math researchers to put something important on arxiv and never submit it to a journal.
Re:Problems with Eric Weinstein's “Geometric Unity”
by meowface on Saturday March 06, 2021 @06:41PM
(#26371596)
As someone totally unfamiliar with all of this, what's the exception you're referring to?
Re:Problems with Eric Weinstein's “Geometric Unity”
by woopwoop on Saturday March 06, 2021 @06:43PM
(#26371622)
Perelman's proof of the poincare conjecture.
Re:Problems with Eric Weinstein's “Geometric Unity”
by jorgesborges on Saturday March 06, 2021 @06:08PM
(#26371373)
He said recently in a conversation with Lex Friedman that he intends to release a complete paper April 1st.
Re:Problems with Eric Weinstein's “Geometric Unity”
by ineedasername on Sunday March 07, 2021 @11:57AM
(#26377452)
Which would be great if he follows through. Unfortunately he has made promises in the past and not followed through, so I can't take his word on that.
Re:Problems with Eric Weinstein's “Geometric Unity”
by trap_chateau on Saturday March 06, 2021 @06:21PM
(#26371462)
I'm surprised Weinstein doesn't consider it important to put technical details out there, especially when it's not like anyone is going to steal this research. All it takes is a submission to arXiv to not only popularize his ideas but to submit them to the peer review of everyone, since he holds a quarrel with institutional review.
Re:Problems with Eric Weinstein's “Geometric Unity”
by mgamache on Saturday March 06, 2021 @06:22PM
(#26371472)
He points out that most of our foundational science was published outside of peer review. For example: Watson & Crick's double-helix hypothesis.
Re:Problems with Eric Weinstein's “Geometric Unity”
by jchallis on Saturday March 06, 2021 @06:48PM
(#26371655)
That’s a pretty bold claim. The 1953 Nature paper laid out both the double helix and the Central Dogma (which is arguably the more important result). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_Structure_of_Nucleic...
I'm fine with skepticism of the traditional research publication path, but "take my word for it" is a significantly worse alternative.