Playing catch-up here:
- Science is Hard - Chad's take
- Waiting for the Revolution - David Gross's take
- Why Open Access Makes No Sense - I think Robin Osborne is actually saying something other than social network reactions thought he was saying, but I am not saying he is right.
- The End of Kepler - Chris Tinney's take.
This is the week they try to jostle the Kepler reaction wheels back to life.
Long shot. Worth trying. - Build a Better Solar System
- Something Seems Wrong With This Tenure Math
- MOOA! Ahahahahahahaha.
No. Seriously. Why not? - Why pre-School Shouldn't Be Like School
- Better Conference Talk's - Emily Lakdawalla's take
- Ragnar's Saga Loðbrólkar
PS: Real Programmers Don't Use Pascal - h/t B. Weiner from Astronomers fb - read this a loooong time ago
Lucky for some...
More like this
I come to praise Kepler, not to bury it...
Kepler 10-b, announced at the Annual meeting of the American Astronomical Society today, has a mass of 4.6 Earth masses and a radius of 1.4 Earth radii. Density of 8.8
Kepler 10b: Exoplanet Catalog
"The diversity of the phenomena of nature is so vast and the treasures hidden in the heavens so rich precisely in order that the human mind shall never be lacking in fresh nourishment." -Johannes Kepler, and the adopted saying of the Kepler mission
“Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds.” -Richard Feynman
An interesting argument for open access just popped into Eli's head (have to blog, have to blog). Essentially it goes that subscription journal force universities (and funding agencies) to pay twice. First, for the cost of the research, second for the cost of the subscription (which shows up in the indirect costs to the government)