Do people cite the works of David Hilbert and Albert Einstein?
How come people use Hilbert spaces without citing Hilbert?
How do researchers write papers using relativity theory without citing Einstein?
I've heard of people not needing to cite Newton for his invention of calculus - is this a good analogy for why we don't cite Einstein or Hilbert?
research-process citations mathematics physics
asked 3 hours ago
user104213user104213
361
New contributor
user104213 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
How come people use Hilbert spaces without citing Hilbert?
How do researchers write papers using relativity theory without citing Einstein?
I've heard of people not needing to cite Newton for his invention of calculus - is this a good analogy for why we don't cite Einstein or Hilbert?
research-process citations mathematics physics
asked 3 hours ago
user104213user104213
361
New contributor
user104213 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
You don't have to cite the original sources for things that have been part of general knowledge for decades. If you do want to cite something for them, you cite whatever is more readable (which is usually textbooks these days).
– darij grinberg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
How come people use Hilbert spaces without citing Hilbert?
How do researchers write papers using relativity theory without citing Einstein?
I've heard of people not needing to cite Newton for his invention of calculus - is this a good analogy for why we don't cite Einstein or Hilbert?
research-process citations mathematics physics
asked 3 hours ago
user104213user104213
361
New contributor
user104213 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
How come people use Hilbert spaces without citing Hilbert?
How do researchers write papers using relativity theory without citing Einstein?
I've heard of people not needing to cite Newton for his invention of calculus - is this a good analogy for why we don't cite Einstein or Hilbert?
research-process citations mathematics physics
research-process citations mathematics physics
asked 3 hours ago
user104213user104213
361
New contributor
user104213 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 3 hours ago
user104213user104213
361
New contributor
user104213 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 3 hours ago
user104213user104213
361
New contributor
user104213 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 3 hours ago
user104213user104213
361
asked 3 hours ago
user104213user104213
361
361
New contributor
user104213 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
user104213 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
user104213 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
You don't have to cite the original sources for things that have been part of general knowledge for decades. If you do want to cite something for them, you cite whatever is more readable (which is usually textbooks these days).
– darij grinberg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
2
You don't have to cite the original sources for things that have been part of general knowledge for decades. If you do want to cite something for them, you cite whatever is more readable (which is usually textbooks these days).
– darij grinberg
2 hours ago
2
2
You don't have to cite the original sources for things that have been part of general knowledge for decades. If you do want to cite something for them, you cite whatever is more readable (which is usually textbooks these days).
– darij grinberg
2 hours ago
You don't have to cite the original sources for things that have been part of general knowledge for decades. If you do want to cite something for them, you cite whatever is more readable (which is usually textbooks these days).
– darij grinberg
2 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Something I have found very useful in thinking about these boundaries is a categorization of "levels of fact" presented in Laboratory Life by Latour and Woolgar.
By observing and categorizing assertions found in scientific writing, they identified five levels of acceptance of assertions in practice, which were approximately, from least to most accepted:
- Assertion is not accepted and must be argued with novel data.
- Assertion can be argued through citation, but may still be controversial.
- Assertion is generally accepted, but should be cited.
- Assertion is so broadly accepted that citation is no longer necessary.
- Assertion is common knowledge that no longer even needs to be stated.
Views on the level of particular assertions obviously will vary strongly over time and between communities, but I find the general principle tends to hold.
Under this view, it can be seen that things like Hilbert Spaces and the theory of relativity have generally moved at least to the fourth level, where failure to cite is both appropriate and may even be understood as a level of respect beyond citation.
answered 3 hours ago
jakebealjakebeal
145k30522763
Have to say that I like this - one for the answer ie content and two for the quality of the answer. Plus 1...
– Solar Mike
19 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
user104213 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f124637%2fdo-people-cite-the-works-of-david-hilbert-and-albert-einstein%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Something I have found very useful in thinking about these boundaries is a categorization of "levels of fact" presented in Laboratory Life by Latour and Woolgar.
By observing and categorizing assertions found in scientific writing, they identified five levels of acceptance of assertions in practice, which were approximately, from least to most accepted:
- Assertion is not accepted and must be argued with novel data.
- Assertion can be argued through citation, but may still be controversial.
- Assertion is generally accepted, but should be cited.
- Assertion is so broadly accepted that citation is no longer necessary.
- Assertion is common knowledge that no longer even needs to be stated.
Views on the level of particular assertions obviously will vary strongly over time and between communities, but I find the general principle tends to hold.
Under this view, it can be seen that things like Hilbert Spaces and the theory of relativity have generally moved at least to the fourth level, where failure to cite is both appropriate and may even be understood as a level of respect beyond citation.
answered 3 hours ago
jakebealjakebeal
145k30522763
Have to say that I like this - one for the answer ie content and two for the quality of the answer. Plus 1...
– Solar Mike
19 mins ago
add a comment |
Something I have found very useful in thinking about these boundaries is a categorization of "levels of fact" presented in Laboratory Life by Latour and Woolgar.
By observing and categorizing assertions found in scientific writing, they identified five levels of acceptance of assertions in practice, which were approximately, from least to most accepted:
- Assertion is not accepted and must be argued with novel data.
- Assertion can be argued through citation, but may still be controversial.
- Assertion is generally accepted, but should be cited.
- Assertion is so broadly accepted that citation is no longer necessary.
- Assertion is common knowledge that no longer even needs to be stated.
Views on the level of particular assertions obviously will vary strongly over time and between communities, but I find the general principle tends to hold.
Under this view, it can be seen that things like Hilbert Spaces and the theory of relativity have generally moved at least to the fourth level, where failure to cite is both appropriate and may even be understood as a level of respect beyond citation.
answered 3 hours ago
jakebealjakebeal
145k30522763
Have to say that I like this - one for the answer ie content and two for the quality of the answer. Plus 1...
– Solar Mike
19 mins ago
add a comment |
Something I have found very useful in thinking about these boundaries is a categorization of "levels of fact" presented in Laboratory Life by Latour and Woolgar.
By observing and categorizing assertions found in scientific writing, they identified five levels of acceptance of assertions in practice, which were approximately, from least to most accepted:
- Assertion is not accepted and must be argued with novel data.
- Assertion can be argued through citation, but may still be controversial.
- Assertion is generally accepted, but should be cited.
- Assertion is so broadly accepted that citation is no longer necessary.
- Assertion is common knowledge that no longer even needs to be stated.
Views on the level of particular assertions obviously will vary strongly over time and between communities, but I find the general principle tends to hold.
Under this view, it can be seen that things like Hilbert Spaces and the theory of relativity have generally moved at least to the fourth level, where failure to cite is both appropriate and may even be understood as a level of respect beyond citation.
answered 3 hours ago
jakebealjakebeal
145k30522763
Something I have found very useful in thinking about these boundaries is a categorization of "levels of fact" presented in Laboratory Life by Latour and Woolgar.
By observing and categorizing assertions found in scientific writing, they identified five levels of acceptance of assertions in practice, which were approximately, from least to most accepted:
- Assertion is not accepted and must be argued with novel data.
- Assertion can be argued through citation, but may still be controversial.
- Assertion is generally accepted, but should be cited.
- Assertion is so broadly accepted that citation is no longer necessary.
- Assertion is common knowledge that no longer even needs to be stated.
Views on the level of particular assertions obviously will vary strongly over time and between communities, but I find the general principle tends to hold.
Under this view, it can be seen that things like Hilbert Spaces and the theory of relativity have generally moved at least to the fourth level, where failure to cite is both appropriate and may even be understood as a level of respect beyond citation.
answered 3 hours ago
jakebealjakebeal
145k30522763
answered 3 hours ago
jakebealjakebeal
145k30522763
answered 3 hours ago
jakebealjakebeal
145k30522763
answered 3 hours ago
jakebealjakebeal
145k30522763
145k30522763
Have to say that I like this - one for the answer ie content and two for the quality of the answer. Plus 1...
– Solar Mike
19 mins ago
add a comment |
Have to say that I like this - one for the answer ie content and two for the quality of the answer. Plus 1...
– Solar Mike
19 mins ago
Have to say that I like this - one for the answer ie content and two for the quality of the answer. Plus 1...
– Solar Mike
19 mins ago
Have to say that I like this - one for the answer ie content and two for the quality of the answer. Plus 1...
– Solar Mike
19 mins ago
add a comment |
user104213 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user104213 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user104213 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user104213 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f124637%2fdo-people-cite-the-works-of-david-hilbert-and-albert-einstein%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
You don't have to cite the original sources for things that have been part of general knowledge for decades. If you do want to cite something for them, you cite whatever is more readable (which is usually textbooks these days).
– darij grinberg
2 hours ago