Launch of canonical science reports
CfCS
UPDATED CANONICAL SCIENCE REPORT
Launch of canonical science reports
_______________________________________________________________________
This report updates to CSR:20081v4.
In response to public demand, the Center improves the Open Access to
this 'living' journal.
Readers will better appreciate the efforts of the Center if take into
account the academic context. For example, some scientific societies
do not offer Open Access to the references and figures on the
literature that they publish despite receiving funding from public and
private agencies.
A discussion of economic and academic issues (including an analysis of
PloS' finances and the wars of academic societies as APS and ACS for
the control of the access to the scientific information generated by
third parties) is offered in the Perspective report "Science in the
21st century: social, political, and economic issues"
The latest version of both reports can be freely downloaded from the
links attached below.
NEWS AND BLOG:
______________
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/canonicalsciencetoday/20091110.html
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/canonicalsciencetoday/canonicalsciencetoday.html
METADATA, REFERENCES, AND DOWNLOAD:
___________________________________
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/canonicalsciencereports/20081.html
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/canonicalsciencereports/20082.html
Uncle Al
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> UPDATED CANONICAL SCIENCE REPORT
THIS IS THE WAY THINGS SHOULD BE
THIS IS THE WAY THINGS ARE
===================================
(should be) - (are) = (net bullshit)
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
tadchem
> CfCS wrote:
>
> > _______________________________________________________________________
>
> > UPDATED CANONICAL SCIENCE REPORT
>
> [snip crap]
>
> THIS IS THE WAY THINGS SHOULD BE
> THIS IS THE WAY THINGS ARE
> ===================================
> (should be) - (are) = (net bullshit)
...from a spherical bull.
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
eric gisse
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> UPDATED CANONICAL SCIENCE REPORT
>
> Launch of canonical science reports
> _______________________________________________________________________
It isn't really a journal when the editor, owner, and referee are the same
guy. And there's only one author.
[...]
tadchem
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> UPDATED CANONICAL SCIENCE REPORT
>
> Launch of canonical science reports
My prediction: "Canonical Science" will become canonical cannon
fodder. The concept of "canonical" science is anathema to the
application of the scientific method.
"The hardest mistakes to see are your own. That's why you should
always use someone else as a proofreader." - Margaret Davidson (my
Mother, a professional proofreader)
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
jmfbahciv
that's been missed.
/BAH
CfCS
The word canonical is not anathema. Canonical general relativity is a
branch of modern physics, canonical ensemble is a central concept in
statistical mechanics, canonical quantization is fundamental in
quantum field theory, etc.
Canonical becomes from the word "Canon" (Greek word "kanon"), which
means basic rule of general applicability.
The "canonical theory" was originally invented and developed by the
physical-chemist (later theoretical biologist) Joel Keizer. His
original unified theory was very well received by physicists,
chemists, and biologists.
Keizer's original canonical theory has been generalized, giving us a
unified theory of physical, chemical and biological processes. This
modern extension has been praised by important Keizer's coworkers as
Prof. Ronald F. Fox (APS Outstanding Referee among other awards):
«I like your approach, both the extension of Keizer's work and the use
of effective parameters. It is interesting that Keizer abstracted his
ideas from macroscopic thermodynamics and that use of your extension
seems to work for mesoscopic systems where it may not be justified by
Keizer's original thinking. However, we found long ago that the
fluctuation theory worked down to the angstrom level and could give
results in agreement with neutron scattering. Thus your extension may
be valid for related reasons. I am glad to see that you do not find
violations even at the mesoscopic level.»
This and other quotes, as well as the origin, present status, and
future developments on canonical science may be found at the freely
accessible report «canonical science: its history, goals, and future».
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/canonicalsciencereports/20083.html
TO LEARN MORE:
Partial and complete observables for canonical general relativity
2006: Class. Quantum Grav. 23, 6155-6184. Dittrich, B.
tadchem
<snip repost>
> The word canonical is not anathema. Canonical general relativity is a
> branch of modern physics, canonical ensemble is a central concept in
> statistical mechanics, canonical quantization is fundamental in
> quantum field theory, etc.
>
> Canonical becomes from the word "Canon" (Greek word "kanon"), which
> means basic rule of general applicability.
Quick definitions (canonical)
▸ adjective: conforming to orthodox or recognized rules ("The
drinking of cocktails was as canonical a rite as the mixing- Sinclair
Lewis")
▸ adjective: of or relating to or required by canon law
▸ adjective: appearing in a Biblical canon ("A canonical book of the
Christian New Testament")
▸ adjective: reduced to the simplest and most significant form
possible without loss of generality ("A canonical syllable pattern")
http://www.onelook.com/?w=canonical&ls=a
The only thing "orthodox" about science is reliance upon empirical
validation. No matter how well-established a "recognized rule" is it
can always, in principle, be invalidated by a single reproducible
measurement.
As scientists our task is to infer those rules which can be
empirically validated to describe the Universe. Should another
scientist come along and make a novel observation which reveals an
exception to the rules, the old rule MUST be abandoned in favor of one
which accounts for the complete new set of observations.
The 'rules' are not orthodox or part of an established canon. They
are always subject to abandonment at a moment's notice, should they
prove inadequate. Like Edison in his search for a workable filament
for an incandescent bulb, we keep trying something different,
discarding al the failures, until we find something that does NOT fail
our tests. We then accept that and start looking for new tests.
GR was initially validated (and Newtonian gravity discarded) in the
1920's, but we continue to devise new tests such as Gravity Probe B.
So far GR does not disappoint.
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
Androcles
"tadchem" <tad...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6b56a7ba-ce4c-4057...@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
GR was initially validated (and Newtonian gravity discarded) in the
1920's, but we continue to devise new tests such as Gravity Probe B.
So far GR does not disappoint.
=======================================================
Easter eggs were initially validated (and painted eggs discarded) in the
1920's, but we continue to devise new tests such as chocolate cr�me eggs.
So far the Easter Bunny does not disappoint.
eric gisse
[...]
> GR was initially validated (and Newtonian gravity discarded) in the
> 1920's, but we continue to devise new tests such as Gravity Probe B.
> So far GR does not disappoint.
Watch him write rather silly things in response, supported by opinions
published on his homepage.
>
> Tom Davidson
> Richmond, VA
CfCS
> On Nov 12, 11:41 am, CfCS <nore...@canonicalscience.org> wrote:
>
> <snip repost>
>
> > The word canonical is not anathema. Canonical general relativity is a
> > branch of modern physics, canonical ensemble is a central concept in
> > statistical mechanics, canonical quantization is fundamental in
> > quantum field theory, etc.
>
> > Canonical becomes from the word "Canon" (Greek word "kanon"), which
> > means basic rule of general applicability.
>
> Quick definitions (canonical)
>
> ▸ adjective: conforming to orthodox or recognized rules ("The
> drinking of cocktails was as canonical a rite as the mixing- Sinclair
> Lewis")
> ▸ adjective: of or relating to or required by canon law
> ▸ adjective: appearing in a Biblical canon ("A canonical book of the
> Christian New Testament")
> ▸ adjective: reduced to the simplest and most significant form
>
> The only thing "orthodox" about science is reliance upon empirical
> validation. No matter how well-established a "recognized rule" is it
> can always, in principle, be invalidated by a single reproducible
> measurement.
>
> As scientists our task is to infer those rules which can be
> empirically validated to describe the Universe. Should another
> scientist come along and make a novel observation which reveals an
> exception to the rules, the old rule MUST be abandoned in favor of one
> which accounts for the complete new set of observations.
>
> The 'rules' are not orthodox or part of an established canon. They
> are always subject to abandonment at a moment's notice, should they
> prove inadequate. Like Edison in his search for a workable filament
> for an incandescent bulb, we keep trying something different,
> discarding al the failures, until we find something that does NOT fail
> our tests. We then accept that and start looking for new tests.
>
> GR was initially validated (and Newtonian gravity discarded) in the
> 1920's, but we continue to devise new tests such as Gravity Probe B.
> So far GR does not disappoint.
>
> Tom Davidson
> Richmond, VA
The word "canonical" has a complete scientific meaning in the usual
scientific terms: Canonical general relativity, canonical ensemble,
canonical quantization, canonical theory, etc.
The Caltech dictionary (item #25 in your onelook link) gives another
usage to the word canonical in science:
«The Canonical Approach to dynamics refers to the scheme in which the
basic constituent is a space of states and the evolution of the system
is described by a curve in this space parametrized by time. This
approach to classical physics is in many respects the basic one to
adopt when attempting to include quantum effects. In the case of a
field theory, it has the disadvantage that space and time are treated
on a different footing, and hence it is not always an easy matter to
show that the formalism is compatible with the theory of relativity.»
The canonical theory is a branch of modern science with multiple
applications to physics, chemistry, and biology: from egg metabolism
to heat conduction in solids or to chemical reactions in surfaces!
TO LEARN MORE:
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/canonicalsciencereports/20083.html
eric gisse
[...]
Juan, posting under a different handle is pointless. We all know it is you.
Kinda hard to make a journal when you are the only one involved.