When Atlas carries the Earth, upon what does he stand? You need a falsifiable observable. Nothing short of religion can argue against empirical reality.
hah, wait, I know that one! He stands on the back of an elephant, who stands on turtles, that stand on even more turtles!
I like guacamole. Maybe if you can smother that burrito with it?
I like guacamole.me too. i've smothered 2 pages, lets see what the burrito thinks.
I had a paper rejected on the grounds that "the author takes the statements made in paper X much too seriously..." That's right, apparently the author of X did not intend his statements to be taken seriously. I wonder how the referee knew this? Could it be that he has some telepathic connection with the author of X? What do you think?
What do you think?I think they should pick the referees more carefully ;-) Here's an encouraging story. Last year I sent a paper to CQG. After a very long delay, I received 4 referee reports at once. All said, the paper is correct, but the content is obvious, and not worth publishing. I wrote back: if it's so obvious then why do people repeatedly miss this point, and shouldn't even the apparently obvious be at least once published? So, they published it without further discussion.Yesterday, I received an email from CQG saying You will be delighted to hear that your article [is] one of our top 30 downloaded articles published in the journal last year.Obvious, eh?
Obvious! Mathematicians call it "trivial" (somebody proved it). It's an elephant then tortoises all the way down, not turtles. Turtles would be silly. "8^>) The big debate is if at the bottom of the infinite stack of tortioses there is an elephant, then Atlas, then the Earth again. Makes for easier boundary conditions.
The big debate is if at the bottom of the infinite stack of tortioses there is an elephant,well, as long as the TORTOISES are all equally fat, there is no end of the stack - I thought that's the whole point?
Post a Comment