[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 2.60 MB, 4032x3024, based-dick.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11169651 No.11169651 [Reply] [Original]

paste good /sci/-related book excerpts. here is a good one i came across the other day. based Feynman hating on string theory

>> No.11169664

wtf I love Feynman now.
>This whole discussion is pointless!
BTFO dogmatic physishits

>> No.11169667

that is pretty based

>> No.11169775

OP here. i am a little drunk (friday night you know) and i was just thinking about how i read a lot of books like this. i also read actual history-of-science books by helge kragh

i bet i could write a decent history of particle physics and string theory, but since i work as an actual scientist (and many years away from tenure unless i get lucky) i would never dare to write anything under my own name. hence why i post here. so if i wrote up something longer-form on the history of particle physics and string theory, could i get it out there without doxxing myself? like does any publisher take "anonymous" as an author? or is there anyplace one might post something like that where people would actually read it

>> No.11169779

>>11169775
Not even trying to be rude, but you might be better off asking /lit/. That sounds interesting, anon

>> No.11169784

>>11169779
ugh i hate those guys though

>> No.11169818

>>11169784
Yeah, same. Maybe >>>/his/ can help. I dunno. Uironically hit up reddit, I'm sure there's something over there for people who want to self-publish or publish anonymously.

>> No.11169827

>>11169775
write it under a pseudonym with the proper documentation leading it back to you if it actually means something. Duhhhh

>> No.11169837

>>11169827
it wouldn't mean anything -- even if i had a really good take on the history of high energy physics then it wouldn't mean anything IMO. the leading physicists and people who work for the funding agencies don't really care about history, afaict. so it wouldn't matter, ultimately. but i think plenty of people could benefit from a non popsci interpretation of how we arrived at the current buzzwords and memes in the field. therefore i would certainly choose to fully prevent any kind of doxxing

>> No.11169867

>>11169837
I would read that.

>> No.11169934

>>11169837
Then just do it. I'm sure at least one publishing company would be intrigued, and if you're an actual professor then you'll most likely have the money to fund the first few copies anyway. Pick a catchy pseudonym and then put an encrypted message in the book for proof, if it ever blows up (maybe it won't but who cares).