R**********n
发帖数: 523 | |
w****y
发帖数: 2501 | 2 一帮叫兽争抢外行nobody cares的东西，都field medalist还这么整
哎整个数学界也跟着丢吧 |
g****a
发帖数: 1520 | 3 是小偷丢人，还是抓小偷的人丢人？
【在 R**********n 的大作中提到】
|
l********e
发帖数: 413 | 4 数学家最丢人。
【在 R**********n 的大作中提到】
|
m****p
发帖数: 11 | 5 Report on 胡森的文章 "On recent works of constructing Kaehler-Einstein
metrics"
应该代表了大部分专家的意见。 |
W**L
发帖数: 137 | 6 这个劲爆啊，哪弄的？
一般的杂志不敢发这个吧，田及其背后的势力还是很大的
多半估计是Yau旗下的杂志？
JDG？AJM？
【在 m****p 的大作中提到】
: Report on 胡森的文章 "On recent works of constructing Kaehler-Einstein
: metrics"
: 应该代表了大部分专家的意见。
|
x***e
发帖数: 13 | 7 I am not an expert in the field. I don't know who copied whom either because
I am not one of CDS or Tian. Maybe there is no plagiarism involved at all.
It is just two groups of people competing for credit for research they did.
However, I think it is clear that both Hu's paper and this review are very
unprofessional. Mathematics journals should publish mathematical results,
not gossips in mathematics. A review paper should be a paper that only
review mathematical development, not the development of the politics
involved.
I encourage you to look at the following article (which has nothing to do
with what's discussed on this board) to see how politics should be excluded
from mathematical publications. It may not a perfect fit but it gives you a
flavor:
http://www.ams.org/publications/david-vogan-letter
It is in interviews like this:
http://www.ams.org/notices/200204/fea-nirenberg.pdf
that you can express your personal opinions or propagate gossips.
You have the right to attack (not physically) other mathematicians, but not
on a professional level.
Just my $0.02.
【在 m****p 的大作中提到】
: Report on 胡森的文章 "On recent works of constructing Kaehler-Einstein
: metrics"
: 应该代表了大部分专家的意见。
|
f******h
发帖数: 104 | 8 Don't be so serious. This board is just about gossips of mathematicians.
Readers will have their own judges.
because
.
excluded
【在 x***e 的大作中提到】
: I am not an expert in the field. I don't know who copied whom either because
: I am not one of CDS or Tian. Maybe there is no plagiarism involved at all.
: It is just two groups of people competing for credit for research they did.
: However, I think it is clear that both Hu's paper and this review are very
: unprofessional. Mathematics journals should publish mathematical results,
: not gossips in mathematics. A review paper should be a paper that only
: review mathematical development, not the development of the politics
: involved.
: I encourage you to look at the following article (which has nothing to do
: with what's discussed on this board) to see how politics should be excluded
|
x***e
发帖数: 13 | 9 I understand. That's why I never made any comment on this board before. But
I think Hu's paper and the review of Hu's paper go beyond the limit (unless
they are the ones directly involved in the controversy). It is not something
that should be encouraged. I know there are quite a few well-established
mathematicians and many young ones here. I hope the young ones don't model
themselves after Hu and that reviewer.
Sorry if I sound like a stupid old guy to you. I promise this is my last
comment on this.
【在 f******h 的大作中提到】
: Don't be so serious. This board is just about gossips of mathematicians.
: Readers will have their own judges.
:
: because
: .
: excluded
|
W**L
发帖数: 137 | 10 我只能部分同意你说的。
Hu(及reviewer)所写的都是gossip？他一条条reference列出来的对比都是谣言？
对于这个事情，所有人包括当事人以及其他人都有权利发表自己的意见，最重要的是他
们所说的必须是建立在扎实的证据基础上，这样我们才可以相互比较得出自己的结论。
胡的东西，CDS的指控以及田的回应，凡是建在公开的资料基础上的，所有人都可以比
较都可以作出自己的判断。reviewer写的这段历史是不是这样，圈内人应该很清楚，但
是其他人估计就不是很了解了。
不可取的是当年dingweiyue和项骂娘式的回应Yau
我并不认为这个关于priority的争论属于政治范畴，至少目前来看各方争论的内容都还
是在正常的学术框架之下。这种争论在数学发展的历史上一直都有，不可避免的（尽管
我们的前辈做了很多事情尽可能的避免这种状况）。这个领域之内或之外的年轻人都应
该知道这些争论，并做出自己的判断，因为他们今后的生涯说不定就会碰上类似的情况。
恰恰相反的是，任何不是建立在事实和学术基础上，试图把这个事件政治化的企图都是
值得怀疑的。
But
unless
something
【在 x***e 的大作中提到】
: I understand. That's why I never made any comment on this board before. But
: I think Hu's paper and the review of Hu's paper go beyond the limit (unless
: they are the ones directly involved in the controversy). It is not something
: that should be encouraged. I know there are quite a few well-established
: mathematicians and many young ones here. I hope the young ones don't model
: themselves after Hu and that reviewer.
: Sorry if I sound like a stupid old guy to you. I promise this is my last
: comment on this.
|
|
|
r******k
发帖数: 97 | 11 "I don't know who copied whom"
Dare you say you are unbiased?
because
.
excluded
【在 x***e 的大作中提到】
: I am not an expert in the field. I don't know who copied whom either because
: I am not one of CDS or Tian. Maybe there is no plagiarism involved at all.
: It is just two groups of people competing for credit for research they did.
: However, I think it is clear that both Hu's paper and this review are very
: unprofessional. Mathematics journals should publish mathematical results,
: not gossips in mathematics. A review paper should be a paper that only
: review mathematical development, not the development of the politics
: involved.
: I encourage you to look at the following article (which has nothing to do
: with what's discussed on this board) to see how politics should be excluded
|
h********0
发帖数: 12056 | 12 看你很可怜，灌水还战战兢兢，不是不是文革给批斗傻了。今年九十几了？
But
unless
something
【在 x***e 的大作中提到】
: I understand. That's why I never made any comment on this board before. But
: I think Hu's paper and the review of Hu's paper go beyond the limit (unless
: they are the ones directly involved in the controversy). It is not something
: that should be encouraged. I know there are quite a few well-established
: mathematicians and many young ones here. I hope the young ones don't model
: themselves after Hu and that reviewer.
: Sorry if I sound like a stupid old guy to you. I promise this is my last
: comment on this.
|
x***e
发帖数: 13 | 13 I replied to your mail box a few days ago. Check that.
【在 W**L 的大作中提到】
: 我只能部分同意你说的。
: Hu(及reviewer)所写的都是gossip？他一条条reference列出来的对比都是谣言？
: 对于这个事情，所有人包括当事人以及其他人都有权利发表自己的意见，最重要的是他
: 们所说的必须是建立在扎实的证据基础上，这样我们才可以相互比较得出自己的结论。
: 胡的东西，CDS的指控以及田的回应，凡是建在公开的资料基础上的，所有人都可以比
: 较都可以作出自己的判断。reviewer写的这段历史是不是这样，圈内人应该很清楚，但
: 是其他人估计就不是很了解了。
: 不可取的是当年dingweiyue和项骂娘式的回应Yau
: 我并不认为这个关于priority的争论属于政治范畴，至少目前来看各方争论的内容都还
: 是在正常的学术框架之下。这种争论在数学发展的历史上一直都有，不可避免的（尽管
|
x***e
发帖数: 13 | 14 Because you are clearly biased and you use your own biased opinion as the
standard, anything I say, as long as it is not the same thing as what you
said, would be biased in your standard.
【在 r******k 的大作中提到】
: "I don't know who copied whom"
: Dare you say you are unbiased?
:
: because
: .
: excluded
|
x***e
发帖数: 13 | 15 If you look at how people (most of whom are educated in some sense) attack
other people on this board, you know 文革 could happen again. 傻 is not a
nice word to say to a man who is older than your grandpa. Have some manners.
【在 h********0 的大作中提到】
: 看你很可怜，灌水还战战兢兢，不是不是文革给批斗傻了。今年九十几了？
:
: But
: unless
: something
|
W**L
发帖数: 137 | 16 I didn't receive it.
WOuld u please forward it to the address: w******[email protected]?
【在 x***e 的大作中提到】
: I replied to your mail box a few days ago. Check that.
|
