3 ms·
What makes it qualify as a scientific paper? It has only 8 references, less than papers published around the same time It was self-published, not subject to p
by iso8859-1 6y ago
What makes it qualify as a scientific paper?
It has only 8 references, less than papers published around the same time
It was self-published, not subject to peer review
It has no proofs
It has errors: https://gist.github.com/harding/dabea3d83c695e6b937bf090eddf2bb3 https://gist.github.com/harding/dabea3d83c695e6b937bf090eddf...
- tehjoker 6y agoThe content is scientific in nature and it spawned an entire field of research. The quality of the paper is of course debatable as are the ideas contained within.
- __blockcipher__ 6y agoHaha this whole exchange is such a good metaphor for classic academic gatekeeping. Satoshi gave birth to an idea that spawned an entire new type of financial system, with revolutionary implications for the world, and the GP is spending his time arguing that it didn't go through peer review and wasn't published by a real journal and therefore it's not real science :P
- tehjoker 6y agoThis kind of thing drives me crazy. Peer review is very valuable, but it was basically instituted to make sure government science grants were not being wasted. It also has a function of keeping crackpots out of the public information stream and increasing paper quality. However, Newton (and "Satoshi", though not at the same level as Newton by a long shot) didn't use such mechanisms but their ideas were eventually accepted (in some fashion) through wide ranging debate.