Saturday, October 13, 2012

Google YouTube Comes up with Worst Idea of the 21st Century

Google YouTube pushes content creators to change their YouTube Channel Name to their own name, first and last to "reduce spam."  Is this a bad idea?  Just received this thoughtful letter.  Happy to share it here. - Mathview

Dear Synthetic Information,

So, the boys at Google and YouTube want us to change our existing channel name to our personal name.  


Why not apply this concept to their own websites?

Should YouTube change its name to The Serge Brin Channel,

and Google to 

Larry & Serge's Special Web Site,

or to AOL? 

Or, even better, combine both sites into

GooTube TM

Why not?  

Maybe, because it's the Dumbest Idea of the 21st Century.  

There's a relevant communication concept known as "Name Recognition."

It works for all levels of content creators. 

Clue-up YouTube.

Sincerely yours,

The Dalai Lama, Himself  

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Secrets for a Successful Upgrade: Windows XP 32bit to Windows 7 64bit

DRAFT POST  Section  2.0

How to Upgrade from Windows XP to Windows 7 Without Too Much Aggravation.

Helpful Tips, Tricks, Secrets, and Frustrating Pitfalls They Don’t Tell You About.

Here we describe the procedure and a timeline for the upgrade from Windows XP 32bit to Windows 7 64bit.  This particular upgrade has a reputation for being tricky, frustrating, and difficult for the home user to do.  We will highlight information and tricks they don’t tell you about. 

We were able to upgrade from Windows XP 32bit to Windows 7 64bit in 7 hours 20minutes elapsed time, and it works perfectly.

Update August 26: This week we successfully upgraded the RAM in our old PC. The old system had XP 32 bit OS and 2GB as 2x1GB DIMMS. So we removed the old RAM and replaced it with 4GB using 2 x2GB DDR2 DIMMs from Newegg. Our install of Win7 64 works great and much faster on HD H.264 video editing and rendering than it did under Win XP 32 /2GB. With this result, I feel our work in upgrading to WIN 7 64 and 4GB RAM was worth the time and effort.
BTW the CPU is an AMD Athlon 64bit Dualcore 2.9GHz clock speed. Oldie but goody.

... now back to the narrative....

Besides referenced sources, we are relying on a set of hand written notes we made during our own, first time experience with the XP to WIN 7 64 upgrade. Provides the POV of the home user. Our notes may contain some inaccuracies and omissions, but I think we have a reasonably accurate story here.

Step 1: Confirm that your XP computer is ready to run Windows 7  (Takes 15-30 minutes)

In this step Microsoft Upgrade Advisor is downloaded and used to determine if your XP computer can handle Windows 7, and the essential Microsoft Tutorial: Upgrading from Windows XP to Windows 7 is downloaded and printed.

It’s a good idea to complete steps 1A and 1B below, before you purchase Windows 7 install disk.

Step 1A: Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor: Download and run it on the computer you want to upgrade.

And yes, Microsoft misspells the word Adviser as Advisor throughout their documentation. So we will follow that convention. It's Upgrade Advisor (sic)
Get Upgrade Advisor at the Microsoft Download Center:
After you download Upgrade Advisor, install it and run Upgrade Advisor.
Upgrade adviser will generate a report telling you if your computer can be upgraded to Windows 7.
If your hardware passes the test, go ahead and start the upgrade process.
If not, add RAM, free up disk space, etc. as recommended, or give up and buy a new PC with Windows 7 pre-installed.  
To install 64bit Windows 7 you must have a 64bit CPU.
Assuming your PC is ready for Windows 7 64bit continue to step 1B.

Step 1B: Print out Microsoft Tutorial: Upgrading from Windows XP to Windows 7
This necessary tutorial is available for viewing and download here:
This Microsoft site offers the option to download a pdf or xps document version of this tutorial.
We recommend you download the pdf and print it. The printed document is 17 pages long.  
You will need to refer to the Tutorial step-by-step procedure during the upgrade process.

Be aware that your computer will not be available for use during most of the Upgrade process.
So print it out and read through it before you do anything further. The tutorial offers further advice about the consequences of upgrading Windows XP to Windows 7.

This completes Step 1

After completing 1A and 1B, you can decide if you still want to attempt to upgrade from XP to WIN 7. If not, have a nice day.  If you want to go for it, then you need to go ahead and purchase the Microsoft Windows 7 upgrade edition package.  I got my copy for $109 at Staples.

Step 2: Prepare your computer’s hard drive and OS for installation of Windows 7.
(This step took 5 hours in my case)

Step 2A: It is best to make sure your installed version of XP is fully up to date with the latest Microsoft updates and  Service Pack 2 or better. Do this now.

Step 2B: Download Windows Easy Transfer utility for windows XP 32bit or 64bit depending on which version of XP you are currently running. It’s a free download from Microsoft.

YOU MUST SAVE Easy Transfer to your EXTERNAL HDD

If you mistakenly run Easy Transfer from your boot (drive C:) the Windows 7 installer will erase the file you created.  We don’t want that.
You can download Windows Easy Transfer utility for XP for free at:

The Easy File Transfer step proceeds as described in the MS Tutorial pages 5 to 8.
In this step, you will transfer your C drive contents to an external hard disk.

The upgrade from XP to WIN 7 requires a “clean install.”  This has implications.
The files on drive C will need to be transferred to the external HHD (call it drive J) before you can install Windows 7.

After you complete the upgrade to Windows 7 64bit you will need to re-install your application programs like Office, Photoshop, ...  

Most XP 32bit applications will run fine under Windows 7.

I used Windows Easy Transfer utility and external HDD (drive J) connected via USB to transfer 100GB of files from internal drive C to external drive J.  

Easy Transfer is automated. You can set it and forget it.  

Easy Transfer displays a progress bar and time to completion estimate.  This transfer took 5 hours to completion, in my case.

When Easy Transfer is complete it will convert the transferred data into one big file having file type MIG. In my case, Easy Transfer created a single 95.6 GB mig file on my external drive J.

This completes Step 2

Step 3 Installing Windows 7

Aside comment:  This section is from the point of view of a first time user going through the upgrade in real time. So, it's "I, we, you" from here on.

In this step, we will install the Windows 7 64bit operating system on a Windows XP 32bit computer that has the capability needed to run from Windows 7 64bit.  

We will run into some problems that are not covered in the Microsoft Tutorial.  

This installation is called a custom install.  Before beginning custom install you may want to run Microsoft MRT.  First disconnect your external are drive.  Then run the MRT.  I used the Quick Scan option and then reconnected the external HDD.

In custom install, you can reformat the internal HDD, but reformatting is not necessary.  If you have a recovery partition in a D drive, it is a good idea to keep the recovery partition. We recommend that you do not reformat the internal hard drive.

Now we can actually insert the Windows 7 64bit disk into the optical drive and restart the computer.  Should be easy from here on, right? Wrong. This step is tricky and partially undocumented...

Resuming narrative: Then during restart, press any key when prompted, and follow the instructions.  On the install Windows page, enter language and other preferences.  Then click next.  

If this step is successful, then go ahead and restart the computer.  

This is where things get tricky....
Be ready to quickly press the escape key.  This is done to bring up the boot options menu.  

The installer only gives you about one second to hit the escape key!  
If you miss it, the computer will boot XP, and not install Windows 7.  
(It may be that pressing any key will work here, but in any case, you have to be very fast.)

You may have to try it a few times to get to the boot options menu.

During my install, the boot options menu offered two choices.  Neither worked.  However...

I went ahead and restarted the again computer, and again pressed "any key" during the one second window of opportunity.  This time, the computer began reading the install disk from the optical drive, and a progress bar appeared indicating that windows files were being loaded. 
An excellent sign we are on the right track.

After loading completed, the Windows 7 splash screen appeared.  Excellent news, but there's more to do.

At some point a preferences menu came up. Notes are incomplete here, but I was able to select preferences and then the option "Install Now" appeared. 

 Then I was asked: "Do you want to install Windows 7?" And a choice of locations was offered.  

I picked a big 256GB partition named drive C.  

You need something like 22GB of total HDD space to install Windows 7 64bit.  Make sure your partition has plenty of extra free space available.

After I picked drive C from the menu items, installing began.  

The install screen shows a progress bar, and takes about five or ten minutes to complete installation.
When "installing updates" finishes, the computer will automatically restart.  

DO NOT PRESS KEYS DURING THIS RESTART! It will screw things up if you do.

During this restart, you will see some messages:  "Setup is updating registry settings."  Then "completing installation." During "completing installation" a big green progress bar appears.  

In my case, the full install step took about 30 minutes.

After installation of Windows 7 is complete, you are asked to choose a username, and name for the computer.  Just type in what you want.  

After this step is complete, you are asked to enter the Product Key code. It's on a sheet of paper in the box that contained your Windows 7 disks.  After the Product Key is accepted, you can set the time and date. Windows then "finalizes settings." After a few more minutes, the Windows 7 Desktop appears on the monitor screen.  Now you are home free!

There was an automatic step in here someplace called "cleaning previous windows installation."  This took about 15 minutes in my installation.

Next it's good idea to connect your computer to the network. I did it via an Ethernet cable through a router, which worked fine under the new OS.  After the network is detected, you will have the option to set up a home network. Do that if you want. After that...

Celebrate! You have completed installation of Windows 7 64bit on your computer.  

You can connect your printer, and browse for 64bit Windows 7 drivers.  You will need to update drivers to 64bit in many applications and devices. Many devices are 64bit enabled and will work fine.

Congratulations! Windows 7 64bit is up and running and you can print stuff out. 

The total elapsed time for this install, including the file transfer step, was 7 hours and 20 minutes.

Windows 7 comes with a good collection of accessories and applications like WordPad, and others.
It's a good idea to create a Windows 7 recovery disk set.  Instruction for that come with the installation disk set.

I've been using this installation of Windows 7 64 bit for a few days now, and it works great with no problems.

Aside comment: << Besides referenced sources, we are relying on a set of notes we made during our own, first time experience with the XP to WIN 7 64 upgrade. The intention is to tell the story from the POV of the home user. One concern is that our hand written notes may contain some inaccuracies and omissions.>>

If you spot anything unclear or inaccurate please comment. Of course, all are welcome to share experiences in the comments section. ...Looking forward to hearing from you...

Sunday, April 15, 2012

Blowing the Whistle on Bad Science at NASA

Experienced Scientists and Engineers Recognize the Classic Signs of Bad Science Coming from  Human Caused Global Warming Believers


1- Extravagant claims of the accuracy and correctness of IPCC climate models
2- Predictions of extraordinary events which do not occur when predicted
3-Warnings of dire consequences if claims of advocates are not believed
4-Politicization of the scientific dialog
5-Refusal to answer  criticism or engage in scientific discussion with critics
6-Advocates claim their theory is manifestly true and free of all possible error
7-Use of figurehead advocates having no scientific standing or relevant resume

We observe that experienced scientists can rather easily detect the signs of bias and improper scientific conduct by advocates who put their beliefs above objective scientific examination.  

Last month a group of highly respected and knowledgeable former  NASA scientists and engineers wrote the following letter that essentially "blows the whistle" on bad science now being practiced by NASA and Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS).

The scientists who wrote this extraordinary letter are clearly angered and saddened that the great scientific reputation of NASA (which they had worked to build throughout their careers) has been taken down by a collection of politically motivated advocates who have abandoned objective scientific practice and values.   

The following is the full text* and list of signatories of an extraordinary letter from former NASA scientists and engineers  expressing their concerns about bad science at NASA.  The letter is addressed to the current NASA "Head Honcho"  Administrator Charles Bolden.

The signers of this letter are highly qualified and accomplished men and women of substantial background and record of achievement in science and engineering.  As I read through this list, I was truly moved by the history of excellence represented by each of these people.  I want to personally thank each of them for their lifetime of contribution to NASA, and their willingness and courage to "step up to the plate" one again. 

Thank you.

March 28, 2012
The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001

Dear Charlie,

We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.

The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.

As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.

For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.

Thank you for considering this request.


(Attached signatures)
CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science
CC: Ass Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight Center
Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.
Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years
 Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years
Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years
Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years
Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years
Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years
Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years
Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years
Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years
Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years
Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years
Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years
 Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years
Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years
Anita Gale
 Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years
 Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years
Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years
Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space Center, 22 years
 Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years
Thomas J. Harmon
David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years
 Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years
James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years
Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years
 Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years
 Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years
 Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space Center, 24 years
 Paul C. Kramer – JSC, Ass.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years
Alex (Skip) Larsen
 Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, Ass’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years
Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years
Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years
Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years
 Tom Ohesorge
James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years
Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years
Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate,40 years
 Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years
 Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years
Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years
Kenneth Suit – JSC, Ass’t Mgr., Systems Integration, Space Shuttle, 37 years
Robert F. Thompson – JSC, Program Manager, Space Shuttle, 44 years/s/ Frank Van Renesselaer – Hdq., Mgr. Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, 15 years

Dr. James Visentine – JSC Materials Branch, Engineering Directorate, 30 years
Manfred (Dutch) von Ehrenfried – JSC, Flight Controller; Mercury, Gemini & Apollo, MOD, 10 years
George Weisskopf – JSC, Avionics Systems Division, Engineering Dir., 40 years
Al Worden – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 15, 9 years
 Thomas (Tom) Wysmuller – JSC, Meteorologist, 5 years

*Posted by Free Republic

Sunday, March 25, 2012

A Brief Guide for New Writers: How to Publish Mathematical and Scientific Papers

Draft Version 1.5 June 18, 2012
Updated February 16, 2013

Guide for New Writers: How to Publish Mathematical and Scientific Papers
By Mathview

Words of Wisdom:

How to win the Nobel Prize... Or at least, get some recognition for your scientific accomplishments.

Getting your paper published does not mean that you will gain recognition for your scientific accomplishment.  It is necessary to publish your work, but not sufficient. If you have something important to share, you must publicize your work in other ways. Usually that means traveling and giving talks, seminars, invited lectures, departmental seminars, interdepartmental seminars, presentations at scientific meetings, and the like. Ivory tower seclusion is a dead end, unless you are counting on being discovered posthumous. 

If you want to win the Nobel prize in your field, I would suggest an organized campaign aimed at getting powerful senior members of your chosen scientific community to think of you as a Nobel candidate. 

Just doing the science is not enough, you must promote your work and explain its importance, significance, impact, and generally tell the world why your stuff is great. Of course, it helps a lot if it's really, objectively, truly great stuff.

Step zero is to do the work. Step one is to get it published.  So, here's how that goes. 

Part 1 Traditional Refereed Archival Academic Journal Publication

First Choose a Journal for Your Paper
If you have completed a potentially interesting calculation, solved a theoretical problem, or done a significant experiment, you may want to publish a paper on your work. The first step is to identify an appropriate journal that will reach your intended audience. If this will be your first publication, you will need to do some research on appropriate journals at your local university library or find relevant journal archives online. Openly accessible online journal archives are often maintained by national scientific societies like the American Physical Society (APS) or the American Mathematical Society (AMS). Some professional societies require membership in order to obtain access to their online journal archives.

There are tons of scientific journals. Some are highly selective, and only accept papers deemed sufficiently important, and of general interest to all professionals in the field. Such publications reach larger audiences of subscribers. Publication in such journals is usually considered more prestigious.

Examples of such prestigious publications include journals like Nature, published by Nature Publishing; Physical Review Letters, published weekly by the American Physical Society; The American Mathematical Monthly, published by the Mathematical Association of America; and the Journal of the American Mathematical Society, published by AMS to mention a few.

Other journals are more specialized and contain papers of interest to a sub-field of specialists. Examples include The Journal of Mathematical Physics published by the American Institute of Physics, and Physical Review D which contains papers of interest to specialists in high energy physics.

Second tier journals such as those published by regional scientific societies have a much smaller readership. Such journals are typically carried by local university libraries.

University Library Systems
Libraries of most Ph.D. granting universities typically maintain subscriptions to all important journals. If you have a “library card” at a university library you may be able to access these archival publications in the library or online. You benefit without cost from the library's paid journal subscriptions. University libraries are an essential resource for perspective authors, and many have a policy that allows access by non-students and non-faculty. For example, any California resident with a valid UC library card can access the University of California library system. This includes collections at UC San Diego, UCLA, and UC Berkeley and the other UC system institutions. Employees of national laboratories like Lawrence Livermore, and Los Alamos National Laboratories can access the collection of the UC Library System.

Subscriptions and Page Charges
Most archival journals offer subscriptions at special rates to members of scientific societies. For example, members of the American Mathematical Society or the American Physical Society can purchase subscriptions  at affordable rates. Libraries pay much higher subscription fees. 

Most refereed scientific journals require the author(s) to pay page charges, a fee per journal page published. If you are an academic employee of a university or laboratory, the institution will usually pick up the page charges. If you are publishing as an individual, most journals offer a discount rate or may waive page charges entirely.

The Referee Process
Most academic journals require all papers be reviewed and critiqued by an anonymous panel of referees, typically three in number. This is sometimes called the peer review process. We prefer the pugilistic referee process.  

The journal editor makes the decision to accept, or request revisions by the author(s), or reject the paper. This decision is based on the written referee reports, and the editor's own judgment and discretion. 

Usually, the author is provided with copies of the referee reports when they become available. The names and institutions of the referees are confidential and not shared with the author(s). The author usually has the opportunity to respond to referee reports and argue for acceptance, or submit revisions to the draft paper that aim to resolve the referee's objections. 

The journal editor has the ultimate authority to accept or reject your paper. The editor in some cases will suggest an alternate appropriate journal to the author, instead of formally rejecting the paper. 

 The author should endeavor to write a paper that passes through the referee process with flying colors and speeds into print. The referee process takes time. Typically several weeks, or even months to complete the process.

Each journal will publish a guide to perspective authors. 
These guides are usually published in specific issues of the journal itself. They will specify the format requirements and other rules for authors. You must obey the rules, or your paper will be immediately rejected. Of course, minor formatting mistakes can be corrected, but usually the editorial staff will ask the author to make the required format changes before the paper is submitted to the referees. Format mistakes can result in delays or rejection of your paper. Learn and follow the rules!

How to Write Your Paper. This is Important!
After you pick a journal that you want to “go for,” you will need to carefully read several articles from that journal. This reading is not so much for content, rather it is to learn, absorb, and get the hang of the elements of writing and composition style standard for the journal. Examine published papers for writing style. Then pick some papers that you particularly like, and want to emulate. Then try to write like your favorite authors.

A few helpful hints for new authors.
Learn how sentences are formulated. Observe how paragraphs and sections are organized. Be concise rather than wordy. Observe the level of detail, the quality of references, and their format. There is no need to try to impress the referees with flowery prose. Showing off can backfire and make you look bad.

Graphic images in scientific publications such as data plots, images, and diagrams are called Figures. Figures are numbered sequentially, and all Figures must have text captions in addition to any graphic text contained in the Figure itself. When a Figure is referenced in the text, an abbreviation like "Fig. 3" is commonly used. Not Figure 3.  

Main equations set between lines of text are usually, but not always, required to have an equation number, like "Eq. 3," adjacent to the equation. Referees and readers often need such numbers for reference. Text lines may have short formulas or symbols embedded. These are not numbered.  

The format for mathematical equations and symbols differs among scientific Journals. 

Journals will also specify a format for references or citations in your paper. Examine published articles in your target journal to see the format rules in action. Be sure to  know and adhere to the format rules specific to your journal of choice. Follow the rules to avoid delays or rejection.

Take care to explain novel data analysis methods, specialized equipment or other techniques that may not be widely known. Or, if they are known and standard techniques, you may simply refer to a classic paper or book. For example, “Here we use the method of xyz [reference] to solve problem pdq.” 

 Well written papers will impress the referees and attract readers.
 The writer should strive to accomplish all of the following writing goals: 

1- Clearly state the main results in a well crafted title and abstract
2- Succinctly describe the methods used 
3- Place the result in wider context 
4- Explain the significance, and novelty of main results
5- If you claim an original, exciting, and new result or finding, be specific
5- Don't forget to acknowledge those who contributed to, or supported the work   

Part 2 Online Publication
Grigory Perelman published his proof of the Poincare conjecture as a series of preprints using online publication at the Cornell University library website called arXiv. Online publishing at arXiv is becoming very popular. Here is a link to the arXiv Primer The Cornell University Library maintains arXiv and arXiv publications are openly accessible to all. 

 The referee process at arXiv is a kind of “crowd sourcing” activity called moderation. Your arXiv paper may receive useful comments from all over. The online publication system requires papers be written using the LaTex or Tex scientific document system. Open source and commercial versions of LaTex and associated document creation software are available. Check the arXiv Primer for more information on document format requirements at arXiv.

Statement by arXiv...

arXiv is NOT a repository for otherwise unpublishable material, NOR is it a refereed publication venue.”

You must register with arXiv (it's free) to access arXiv content and registration is required if you want to submit a paper for publication in one of their online journals. 

Submitting to arXiv (from the Primer)
arXiv accepts submissions of scholarly articles in a variety of formats from registered, endorsed users. The submission process can begin any time after the user has successfully registered. The submission process has several stages:
  • metadata (separate title, author, abstract, etc.) preparation and LaTex, Tex, etc. file verification
  • pending submission status
  • announced submission
  • additions that can be made without submitting a replacement document
  • revision preparation
  • etc.
arXiv submissions are meant to be available in perpetuity. Thus, arXiv has high technical standards for the files that are submitted. The submission process begins with the preparation of valid metadata for the paper and continues through a verification process whereby the files uploaded are checked for certain problems.
Valid upload formats for the primary text file include (La)TeX, PostScript, PDF, and HTML.

If you want to publish your paper, get feedback from interested readers,  and have your paper listed and available to all, then arXiv publication may be a great way to go.

There is a downside to publication via arXiv.
Many universities do not consider arXiv publications to be valid academic publications. You might not get “academic professional credit” for an arXiv paper.

If you publish on arXiv, your paper will probably not be eligible for publication in most archival refereed journals.
Most archival refereed journals will not accept papers that have been uploaded to arXiv. This may change in the future.

Some traditional journals are beginning to use arXiv. The idea is that a “pre-print” version of an accepted journal publication is permitted and even encouraged.

For example, the Institute of Mathematical Statistics “encourages members to post their articles in a preprint format on arXiv.”

And... “IMS wishes to demonstrate by example, that high quality journals supported by the academic community can provide adequate revenue to their publishers even if all of their content is placed on open access digital repository such as arXiv.”

Here is a link to a blog post outlining the pros and cons of publication of scientific papers on arXiv. We note that arXiv has no page charges. Not sure if this link is working at the time of this writing.

How do archival refereed journals interact with arXiv?
Some archival journals encourage the use of arXiv to post pre-prints of papers that have been refereed and accepted for publication.  

That is, if you have a paper that has been accepted for publication in a refereed scientific journal you will be given a publication date. The publication date is the date your paper will appear in print as a journal article. Usually there is a delay of weeks to months between the acceptance date and the publication date. It makes sense to post a pre-print of your paper on arXiv so people can see your stuff early. Many journals allow and or encourage this method of publication of pre-prints. 

What about citations of arXiv papers in the references of your paper? 

Most scientific journals now accept references to papers published via arXiv. arXiv papers are referenced in the usual way using the arXiv reference code numbers, author list, title, etc. 

The use of results from arXiv papers may be problematic since arXiv publications are not refereed in the traditional sense.  That is, there is some risk that the result you are using may not be as thoroughly vetted as a result found in a traditional refereed journal. This is a matter of judgement. It is the responsibility of the author to be certain the arXiv paper is right before using a result from it.  

Some referees may be skeptical of an arXiv published result. So you may have to provide a solid justification, should it be requested by a referee.

If you publish a result via arXiv, will you have priority and recognition as the person who gets the credit for discovering the result?

Although there may be some uncertainty about this, generally, if you have a good valid result in an arXiv paper you will be recognized and credited for your work in traditional refereed journals. 

It would be very bad form for someone to scoop a result from arXiv and try to publish it in a journal as their own work. No one wants to be guilty of such a shady practice. For these reasons I believe arXiv is a good way to establish priority for having discovered or developed a new scientific or mathematical result.   

Even if others obtain your result independently, they are duty bound to credit your prior publication. Of course, sometimes authors are simply unaware of your stuff. If that happens, it is up to you to write to the journal and inform them of your prior work. Usually, the journal will publish a note recognizing your stuff if it has merit.

Nature Publishing's Scientific Reports

Scientific Reports (SR) is an online scientific journal recently introduced by Nature Publishing. Unlike arXiv, Scientific Reports is a peer reviewed publication. SR promises review and publication of scientific papers in the physical and medical sciences on a rapid timescale of 30 days. SR does charge a publication fee per article. SR is meant to be an alternative venue for papers that may not qualify for publication in Nature and its associated printed media journals. 

The SR website is very impressive: 

Recommended resources and references

Reference 1
How to Publish Your First Paper on Mathematics by S.G. Kranz 
American Mathematical Society

This article provides a short guide to writing and publishing a professional quality paper in an archival mathematical journal. Includes a discussion of publication via arXiv. 
Download the pdf at this link:

Reference 2
Wikipedia article about the history of arXiv.
Includes a brief discussion of copyright options available to arXiv authors.

Reference 3
Journal Citation of arXiv Papers and related information from arXiv FAQ.

Reference 4
Should I cite a paper posted on arXiv?  I have written a paper using a result published on arXiv, however the paper is not refereed. Is that a problem?

Absolutely you should cite the arXiv paper, some of the most important mathematical papers are now being published via arXiv. But...
Check out discussion:
The Mathoverflow folks provide a great Q and A forum for mathematical researchers.
But "not for help on your math homework."

Reference 5
"MathOverflow's primary goal is for users to ask and answer research level math questions, the sorts of questions you come across when you're writing or reading articles or graduate level books."

Reference 6
An excellent description of the peer review process can be found here
This one is for Nature Publishing's Scientific Reports.  

Friday, March 23, 2012

Wildwood Flower on the Classic Dulcimer

Wildwood Flower a Traditional American Song Written in 1860, one year before the start of the Civil War. Original title was "I'll Twine 'Mid the Ringlets". The song was written in 1860, with words by Maud Irving and music by Joseph Philbrick Webster (1819–1875).


Wildwood Flower  Original 1860 Lyrics

Oh I Will twine mid the ringlets of my raven black hair
The lilies so pale and the roses so fair
The mytle so bright with an emerald hue and the pale 
arnatus with eyes of bright blue. 

I'll dance and I'll sing and my laugh shall be gay* 
I'll cease this wild weeping, drive sorrow away. 
Though my heart is now breaking, he never shall know 
That his name made me tremble and my pale cheeks to glow. 

I'll think of him, I'll be wildly gay 
I'll charm every heart, and the crowd I will sway. 
I'll live yet to see him regret the dark hour 
When he won then neglected the frail wildwood flower.

He told he loved me and promised to love 
Through ill and misfortune all others above. 
Another has won him, ah misery to tell 
He left me in silence no word of farewell.
 He taught me to love him, he called me his flower 
That blossomed for him all the brighter each hour 
But I woke from my dreaming, my idol was clay 
My visions of love have all faded away.

*There may be a mistake in the first line of the second stanza.

The "folk song process" allows lyrics to evolve.
After 100 years we have the classic Wildwood Flower
performed by the Carter Family in the mid-20th century.

Early Music Radio UK, Wikipedia, Traditional Folk Music Tune Book. 
Videos from YouTube

Monday, February 27, 2012

NIKKEI JAPAN REPORT February 27, 2012

Japan's Economy Industry Creativity and Industry
Watch and Learn

We prefer this to foolish, negative, silly, "entertainment" TV from America.

Thursday, February 9, 2012

Executive Summary of Vimeo streaming video service

Executive Summary

It seems Vimeo (anagram of movie) has gained a reputation as the high class alternative to YouTube.

Not entirely the case, but Vimeo is an impressive service attracting some of the best pure movie making people.

YouTube retains the advantage of volume. As of 2012 YouTube reports about 4 billion (yes that's billion with a B) video views per day.

Wikipedia reports as of December 2011, Vimeo attracted 65 million unique visitors per month and more than 8 million registered users. 15% of Vimeo’s traffic comes from mobile users.

Note that Vimeo offers a basic free service which is great for most of us. Standard Vimeo offers 500MB video upload limit per week and one HD video per week for free.  

Vimeo Plus for $60 per year supports 5GB per week uploads, no banner ads, HD embedding, and some other features.  There's also a Vimeo Pro service for high volume usage commercial applications.

Here are some specifications of the services offered by Vimeo. 

Since August 2010, all videos are encoded into H.264 for HTML5 support.

All videos uploaded before August 2010 were re-encoded. Non-HD videos re-encode at a maximum of 30 frame/s and they also have significantly higher bitrates than other competing video sharing sites.

Standard Vimeo users can upload up to 500 MB of videos per week, and up to one HD video per week (additional HD videos uploaded within the same week are encoded to SD).

As of July 22nd, 2010, the site offers unlimited HD embeds.  As of January 4, 2011, Vimeo Plus users can upload videos that are up to five gigabytes of footage, roughly equivalent to 2.5 hours of HD video. This makes it possible for full length, high-definition feature films to be uploaded to Vimeo by Vimeo Plus users.

Vimeo Awards in New York City

Vimeo's first annual Vimeo Awards took place October 8-9, 2010 in New York City, dedicated towards showcasing and awarding creative video content hosted on the site.

Festival judges included David Lynch, Morgan Spurlock, Rian Johnson, M.I.A., and Charlie White.  The competition received over 6500 entries. Winners were chosen for each category, with the documentary finalist "Last Minutes with Oden" taking home the $25,000 grand prize. Ben Briand's short narrative "Apricot" won the Community Choice Award.

The two-day festival included video screenings and workshops from the likes of Philip Bloom, Lawrence Lessig, and DJ Spooky, and an award show hosted by Ze Frank. A 3D projection-mapping displayed on the Vimeo HQ/IAC building concluded the festival.

Pop world stars who have posted their stuff to Vimeo.

M.I.A., Kanye West, Tom Delonge, Nine Inch Nails, Moby, Beck, Placebo, Lykke Li, Röyksopp, Devin the Dude, Björk and Britney Spears, who premiered her new music video Radar there. Comedians Kristen Schaal, Reggie Watts, and "Weird Al" Yankovic use Vimeo as well.

Founders and Operators of Vimeo

It was founded by Jake Lodwick and Zach Klein in November 2004, who left the company in 2007 and 2008 respectively.

Barry Dillar's IAC (InterActiveCorp) purchased Vimeo in August 2006 as part of its acquisition of Connected Ventures.

Dae Mellencamp is the Chief Executive Officer of Vimeo. In January 2009, Dae Mellencamp joined IAC as General Manager of Vimeo.


In summary, Vimeo offers the video/movie maker or commercial factor a professional quality streaming video platform that can offer noticably higher quality images than competing services.  Such an edge in quality is attractive to those who make use of online streaming video in their businesses. Vimeo has a much smaller audience reach than YouTube. The Vimeo audience is only about one-half percent of YouTube's total audience.

Thursday, February 2, 2012

For all things Mrs. Parker

The Dorothy Parker Society

"Must sees" for the slavish fanboy or fangirl.

A Tour of the Algonquin Hotel and the Round Table Room 
with commentary

We can only imagine what Mrs. Parker and her Algonquin round table friends would say about us. 

But our imaginations may not be up to the task.

The Round Table first met June 1919 for a luncheon to welcome home Aleck Woollcott, the drama critic for the New York Times, back from World War 1.

In 1987 the Algonquin was designated a New York City landmark, however it is not protected by the Landmarks Preservation Commission.

A commemorative painting by Natalie Ascencious was unveiled in 2002 on the occasion of the Alqonquin Hotel's 100th anniversary. 


In 1996 Stuart Silverstein edited “Not Much Fun: The Lost Poems of Dorothy Parker.” 
His comments:

"The enduring legacy of the group of newspaper writers, magazine editors, critics, actors and hangers-on is timeless."

"The first lunch at what later was called the Round Table probably occurred eighty years ago," Silverstein said in 1999. "Yet the term "The Algonquin Round Table" still holds substantial cultural resonance; for example, during the past television season at least three sitcoms employed it as an ironic punch line to skewer characters who spoke badly or stupidly. Is there any other person, or institution, or event from the interwar period that could possibly be used by a mass-market medium as an implicitly understood cultural reference? I cannot think of any -- not even Lindbergh (May 1927) not any more. Perhaps the Stock Market crash."

Those who lunch at the Algonquin round table

From the left: 
Mrs. Parker, drama critic Vanity Fair
Robert Benchley, managing editor of Vanity Fair
Franklin P. Adams, newspaperman
Robert E. Sherwood, playwright and screenwriter
Harpo Marx 
Harold Ross, editor of the New Yorker
Alex Woollcott, drama critic for the New York Times
Mark Connelly, newspaperman
Edna Ferber, novelist 
George S. Kaufman, Heywood Broun; newspapermen

This image of the Vicious Circle a painting by Natalie Ascencios from

This information mostly taken from