Comments on: Last of the First http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/ Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:21:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Student http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23367 Student Wed, 03 Jan 2007 04:16:40 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23367 Ned, Good point. Provided arXiv's collaborators implement the required software modifications by 2011. I wasn't so optimistic :-) Regards, Ned,

Good point. Provided arXiv’s collaborators implement the required software modifications by 2011. I wasn’t so optimistic :-)

Regards,

]]> By: Clifford http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23315 Clifford Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:22:21 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23315 "The first paper of the XXI century and third millenium was hep-th/0101001" I mentioned that paper in the post. And whether its first or not depends. Sure, yes, we probably started counting years with year 1 (not year 0), and so forth -and so many scientists and others get their knickers in a twist about this all too often- but psychologically and culturally, most people count off decades and centuries differently. 1970 is regarded by most people as being in the 70s not the 60s because of, well, you know... the 7. Same for 1990, etc, and hence in people's minds 2000 is not part of the 90s, and so not part of the 20th century, but the first of the 21st. We -as people who make numbers our business- can see that it's *wrong* from the counting perspective... but that's not the only way to view the world... and it's just missing the point entirely. We ought to get over it and fight the numeracy battles that really matter. Cheers, -cvj “The first paper of the XXI century and third millenium was hep-th/0101001″

I mentioned that paper in the post.

And whether its first or not depends. Sure, yes, we probably started counting years with year 1 (not year 0), and so forth -and so many scientists and others get their knickers in a twist about this all too often- but psychologically and culturally, most people count off decades and centuries differently. 1970 is regarded by most people as being in the 70s not the 60s because of, well, you know… the 7. Same for 1990, etc, and hence in people’s minds 2000 is not part of the 90s, and so not part of the 20th century, but the first of the 21st. We -as people who make numbers our business- can see that it’s *wrong* from the counting perspective… but that’s not the only way to view the world… and it’s just missing the point entirely. We ought to get over it and fight the numeracy battles that really matter.

Cheers,

-cvj

]]> By: JoseIRS http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23302 JoseIRS Tue, 02 Jan 2007 17:44:17 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23302 "hep-th/0001001, and in addition to simply looking great2 it is also the first paper on the ArXiv (the hep-th part) for the entire century" The first paper of the XXI century and third millenium was hep-th/0101001: On the Polarization of Unstable D0-Branes into Non-Commutative Odd Spheres Authors: Z. Guralnik, S. Ramgoolam “hep-th/0001001, and in addition to simply looking great2 it is also the first paper on the ArXiv (the hep-th part) for the entire century”

The first paper of the XXI century and third millenium was hep-th/0101001:

On the Polarization of Unstable D0-Branes into Non-Commutative Odd Spheres
Authors: Z. Guralnik, S. Ramgoolam

]]> By: Sara T. http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23289 Sara T. Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:44:29 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23289 FYI, library associations keep giving ArXiv founder Paul Ginsparg awards! (He did after all organize documents to make them accessible later, a core of librarianship.) More recently the CNI folks (Clifford Lynch et al): http://www.cni.org/tfms/2006a.spring/plenary.html Quite some time back, my own Special Libraries Association, Physics/Astro/Math Division honored him: http://units.sla.org/division/dpam/manual/awards/ginsparg.html (He was crusty as usual at the presentation as I remember, but still it was fun to hear him speak.) FYI, library associations keep giving ArXiv founder Paul Ginsparg awards!
(He did after all organize documents to make them accessible later, a core of librarianship.)

More recently the CNI folks (Clifford Lynch et al):
http://www.cni.org/tfms/2006a.spring/plenary.html

Quite some time back, my own Special Libraries Association, Physics/Astro/Math Division honored him:
http://units.sla.org/division/dpam/manual/awards/ginsparg.html
(He was crusty as usual at the presentation as I remember, but still it was fun to hear him speak.)

]]> By: Clifford http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23286 Clifford Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:37:19 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23286 Ned, <blockquote> It is astro-physics - observational and theoretical. </blockquote> I know. I was just wondering if there might have been value in going along the other path. Not to do with numbers, but to do with the science itself. Cheers, -cvj Ned,

It is astro-physics - observational and theoretical.

I know. I was just wondering if there might have been value in going along the other path. Not to do with numbers, but to do with the science itself.

Cheers,

-cvj

]]> By: Ned Wright http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23281 Ned Wright Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:21:22 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23281 Clifford, astro-ph is not astro phenomenology. It is astro-physics - observational and theoretical. And it was close to going over 1000 articles per month too. The numbering scheme should suffice without splitting the field like hep. Student: You will need to get 1111.1111 and good luck with that! Clifford,

astro-ph is not astro phenomenology. It is astro-physics - observational and theoretical. And it was close to going over 1000 articles per month too. The numbering scheme should suffice without splitting the field like hep.

Student:

You will need to get 1111.1111 and good luck with that!

]]> By: Student http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23183 Student Tue, 02 Jan 2007 03:15:16 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23183 I'm planning to get /1111111 the most special number. It's complexity is the lowest. I’m planning to get /1111111 the most special number. It’s complexity is the lowest.

]]> By: Clifford http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23118 Clifford Mon, 01 Jan 2007 17:40:43 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23118 Hi Ned! You know, it occured to me when writing this post that I did not know why there is no astro-th... I can imagine a whole bunch of sorts of papers that would fit into that category quite naturally... theoretical work that is directly applicable to astro/cosmo but not neccessarily related to specific data, etc...... instead, a lot of those papers live in gr-qc, hep-th, and of course astro-ph.... and other categories too..... Just a random thought.... -cvj Hi Ned!

You know, it occured to me when writing this post that I did not know why there is no astro-th… I can imagine a whole bunch of sorts of papers that would fit into that category quite naturally… theoretical work that is directly applicable to astro/cosmo but not neccessarily related to specific data, etc…… instead, a lot of those papers live in gr-qc, hep-th, and of course astro-ph…. and other categories too…..

Just a random thought….

-cvj

]]> By: Ned Wright http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23114 Ned Wright Mon, 01 Jan 2007 16:54:46 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/01/01/last-of-the-first/#comment-23114 I once went to the trouble to get <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph?papernum=0401001" rel="nofollow"> astro-ph/0401001</a>. I once went to the trouble to get

astro-ph/0401001.

]]>