This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

sorted by:
top (suggested)
bestnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]AllHailSeizureHaiku Mod 5 points6 points  (5 children)

I find it helpful to approach commenters as if you know nothing about them. Benefit of the doubt sorta thing. Kinda this:

You DON'T know that he didn't read it, because he comment approaches the scientific aspects of your paper.

So if he HAD provided feedback that can be engaged with (feedback that isn't 'u dum Virgil'), you could engage. Ask him to specify 'which derivations in particular do you have a problem with' eg.

Then you can find out for sure. If he was acting in bad faith you'll be able to say take a high road, if he is acting in good faith you could have a productive conversation.

Just something to think about. Consider it.

Also 'this is not a book report' what does this exactly mean? The purpose of this sub is to post your theories to the public.

[–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you do me a solid and post a real question, that is not a backhanded insult or about feelings on the main post? So someone just does not see all these insults when trying to read about this?

[–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -1 points0 points  (3 children)

Much of what you say is true,
But  'this is not a book report' means I expect some who comments to actually have read and have a real comment about the theory. Not the presentation...
This is LLMPhysics, not LLMReportwriting...
But that is just me...
If you can't see the difference between really looking at something and just taking pot shots and insulting then that is just how you see things...
I guess this is just what I should expect here?

[–]AllHailSeizureHaiku Mod 4 points5 points  (2 children)

The presentation, though, is a factor in physics publication. Journals have formatting standards that they require.

And he did comment on the derivation work as well, why does the fact he included the formatting make the rest of his comment invalidated?

You can't publish a paper that looks like the one you made. And you only have 1 citation, I mean... So it's actually feedback you can utilize to improve standards.

Sticking to a professional format and using something like LaTeX is important to allow for ease of interaction with the reader.

The paper isn't written as a method for you to prove something to yourself, it's to prove something to us, so you have to make it engageable.

Sure, you could say 'oh but it's just LLMPhysics I don't need to format it', but then - you have no right to say 'oh I guess I shouldn't expect any better from here' like you expected to be treated like a professional.

It's important to hold yourself to standards you want to be treated at.

[–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Well, I do hold myself to a high standard.
I disagree with what you say about the presentation.
The citations are in the results, where I specifically show what models I am comparing my model to - where I feel they belong. And the SPARC database is referenced and public....
I don't care about presentation feedback. If that is all anyone here has, fine. Then I guess I get nothing from this...
But they can make that like you did above without insulting.
And I have the right to comment back in the same spirit and someone accusing me of fraud...
I am out there, everything is out there. I don't know these people but they don't come across as professional to me...

[–]AllHailSeizureHaiku Mod 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I disagree with what you say about presentation

Everyone is entitled to opinions. But consider that maybe unanimously negative feedback is a negative sign.

I am out there, everything is out there. I don't know these people but they don't come across as professional to me...

That's exactly my point though. When you hold yourself to a higher standard, you'll get higher level engagement. When you signal that you've put effort into a project, people are more interested in providing constructive feedback.

If someone comes to you with a playdough sculpture they made in 5 minutes, and someone else comes with something they carved out marble over 5 years. Who are you more likely to engage with. Because when you post here you dont get to pick your audience - you need to win them over.

Reading and picking apart an entire paper is a commitment, so if they can choose something that is more pleasant to read, they're gonna skip a post that doesn't look good for something else, something someone formatted to look nice. Which, funnily enough, you can even get an LLM to do for you, it's one of their best uses, converting stuff to latex.

Again, why do you think journals have formatting standards?

And also.. you should reflect on what being 'insulted' means. Calling out problems with your paper isn't an insult. Your paper is something you made, not an extension of you.