Forum for relativity science without the nutters?

Having discovered that our research shares a lot of mathematical machinery
with numerical relativity, I wonder if there is a good forum where the
science/computational problems are discussed? Signal to noise seems
particularly low here, even for a usenet group.

"Phil Scadden" wrote in message ...
Having discovered that our research shares a lot of mathematical machinery
with numerical relativity, I wonder if there is a good forum where the
science/computational problems are discussed? Signal to noise seems
particularly low here, even for a usenet group.

The noise is the fun over here :-)

If you prefer it more to the point and dryer, try a moderated
forum - but make sure it is not moderated by one of the noise
makers ;-)

Good luck,
Dirk Vdm

If you prefer it more to the point and dryer, try a moderated
forum - but make sure it is not moderated by one of the noise
makers ;-)

Any recommendations? Particularly for numerical relativity?

"Phil Scadden" wrote in message ...
If you prefer it more to the point and dryer, try a moderated
forum - but make sure it is not moderated by one of the noise
makers ;-)

Any recommendations? Particularly for numerical relativity?

Try sci.physics.research ...

Dirk Vdm

Phil Scadden wrote:
If you prefer it more to the point and dryer, try a moderated
forum - but make sure it is not moderated by one of the noise
makers ;-)

Any recommendations? Particularly for numerical relativity?

I will echo sci.physics.research, it is moderated. The idiots get
through occasionally, but the brand of idiocy is of a higher form.

Perhaps sci.math.research or sci.math.num-analysis?

"Phil Scadden" wrote in message
...
Having discovered that our research shares a lot of mathematical machinery
with numerical relativity, I wonder if there is a good forum where the
science/computational problems are discussed? Signal to noise seems
particularly low here, even for a usenet group.

The relativists are the nutters, naturally any nutter group is attracted by
nutters. You've just improved the noise to signal ratio.
Black Knight of physics.

Phil Scadden wrote:

If you prefer it more to the point and dryer, try a moderated
forum - but make sure it is not moderated by one of the noise
makers ;-)

Any recommendations? Particularly for numerical relativity?
Sure, alt.local.village.idiot
Black Knight of physics.

Phil Scadden:
Having discovered that our research shares a lot of mathematical machinery
with numerical relativity, I wonder if there is a good forum where the
science/computational problems are discussed?

On usenet? Probably not. If you're sane, then most likely, you'll
have to settle for attempting to impart some sanity to someone who
is sincerely interested in accepting it and whatever you might gleen
from other sane people. But, I've been told I'm a cynic.

Signal to noise seems particularly low here, even for a usenet group.

That's probably an understatement. However, sane people do post here.
A few are even quite knowledgable. That might not be much consolation,
but just think how much one more sane person could increase the signal
to noise.

Phil Scadden wrote:
Having discovered that our research shares a lot of mathematical machinery
with numerical relativity, I wonder if there is a good forum where the
science/computational problems are discussed?

Many topical groups in physics have established private email lists to
foster communication among physicists interested in a given topic. Most
experts in a given field know about these lists and can tell you how to
join them. There is no general index, of course (that would turn them
into clones of usenet). This surely extends far beyond physics....

I belong to several such email lists related to my research interests.
Signal-to-noise is ~99%, with the noise coming not from cranks and
idiots, but rather is mostly SPAM from compromised PCs, so it's
trivially ignorable (and correctable).

Given that you apparently do not know about the lists related to your
interests, you ought to be able to figure out how to find one. Most
lists have a list moderator, and you join by sending email to them; they
can, of course, remove abusive members.

If there is no appropriate list, you are of course free to start one;
getting participants is left as an exercise for the reader (:-)). Gnu
mailman is used to implement most of the lists I belong to.

BTW such email lists are really one of the BIG WINS of the internet.
They're far more useful than usenet.


Signal to noise seems
particularly low here, even for a usenet group.

Yes.


Tom Roberts

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 11:12:18 +1300, Phil Scadden wrote:

Having discovered that our research shares a lot of mathematical machinery
with numerical relativity,

first time I see you here and you dare to "our research shares..." !?

are you ****ing insane?

I wonder if there is a good forum where the
science/computational problems are discussed?

try bilge, he is an expert in numerical implementation
of the models

Signal to noise seems

there are no such things as "signal to noise" and
it cant be law, because it needs to be something,
"signal to noise" is nothing

particularly low here, even for a usenet group.

its not clear what you mean, are complaining that
you are stupid?