3 ms·
> doing my best to explain how Johnson and Jackson proved it using simple trigonometry. Although their proof hasn’t been published They didn't publish it, but
by yosito 4y ago
> doing my best to explain how Johnson and Jackson proved it using simple trigonometry. Although their proof hasn’t been published
They didn't publish it, but this author is just going to take the liberty to publish their work himself? If I were one of these teenagers, this would make me angry.
- robotresearcher 4y agoThe article's author is very clear whose ideas they are reporting. Neither do they aspire to be the definitive citation for the idea. They hope the girls publish, or attempt to publish, and in the process establish their priority by peer review. This is perfectly legit in academic publishing. Credit where credit is due is the rule. You are not obliged to keep stuff secret until the originator has published, only that you attribute the idea properly. This is good, because it means ideas can get out there and be useful without delay.
- yosito 4y agoMaybe not "obliged", but it still seems a bit like stealing thunder to me.
- hgsgm 4y agoThey already presented it at conference. If they are angry (they aren't), it would be their own fault for rushing to the ignorant media for fake publicity before publishing to the math community. Already we see that their approach led to massive fake news reporting based on journalists who had no experts to explain what actually happened, and relied on unvetted claims by high school students (not totally their fault) and their school admins (their fault).