3 ms·

Click "View Publication", the text on the page is just some commentary by the author

• carapace 7y ago
  I know. The commentary is the subject of the HN post, not the paper itself. The meta-story is IMO just as fascinating if not more so than the principle itself. > A little research revealed that psychologists are totally unaware of the phenomenon. > The singularity at zero was never mentioned in the paper. > Philosophers have discussed Buridan’s ass for centuries, but it apparently never occurred to any of them that the planet is not littered with dead asses only because the probability of the ass being in just the right spot is infinitesimal. > I submitted it first to Science. The four reviews ranged from “This well-written paper is of major philosophical importance” to “This may be an elaborate joke.” One of the other reviews was more mildly positive, and the fourth said simply “My feeling is that it is rather superficial.” The paper was rejected. > Throughout this exchange, I wasn’t sure if he was taking the matter seriously or if he thought I was some sort of crank. > My problems in trying to publish this paper and [22] are part of a long tradition. WTF is going on here? This thing on our lawn is a dragon, why do some many people think it's a cloud?