Authorea - a leading collaboration platform to write, share and openly research in realtime - allows people to author manuscripts and include rich media, such as data sets, software, source code and videos. The media-rich, data-driven capabilities Authorea make it the perfect platform to create and disseminate a new generation of research articles, which are natively web-based, open, and reproducible. Here is an example of an equation followed by a figure and references.
A variety of research demonstrates that humans learn and communicate best when more than one processing system is used . Authorea - a leading collaboration platform to write, share and openly research in realtime - allows people to author manuscripts and include rich media, such as data sets, software, source code and videos. The media-rich, data-driven capabilities Authorea make it the perfect platform to create and disseminate a new generation of research articles, which are natively web-based, open, and reproducible.
Are the scholarly publishing tools we're using today still the right ones?What is 'right'?1) Registration (author, date, that was the piece)2) Distribution - no problem in the time of Internet ie. blog, online journal. Includes formatting (device)3) Validation - screening for rigour4) Designation - Getting recognized in promotion committee, branding, co-branding with other scientists5) Push Marketing - publication, not just putting the information out there but to reaching the right readers6) Filtration issue - selectivity 7) Preservation - libraries, institutional repositories. Ensure it endures. Knowledge mobilization - bring collaboration early into the research. Engaging the public, takes it out of the ivory tower. Is the monograph still the best format in the humanities? Make the research available - make it less condescending. Is the journal article still the best in STEM? Peer reviews would be more effective if peer reviewer is known and expert in the field. What would happen if scientists were not allowed to transfer their work/copyright to third party? The system wouldn't break down but publishers would be forced to re-examine open access model. Science is getting data and coming to conclusions as well as funds for dissemination. People make impact factors important. People should stop caring. Shouldn't be a proxy for quality. Flawed incentives creates dysfunctional market. Amy Brand Harvard doesn't use Impact Factor. Is Harvard unique? Work with AAU.
Workgroup MembersAdyam Ghebre, Director of Outreach, AuthoreaElizabeth Kirk, Associate Librarian for Information Resources, Dartmouth CollegeFrank Sander, Director, Max Planck Digital Library, Max Planck SocietyGeoffrey Builder, Director of Strategic Initiatives, CrossrefJoshua Nicholson, CE and Co-Founder, The WinnowerMelinda Kenneway, Executive Director and Co-Founder, KudosMathew Salter, Publisher, American Physical SocietyPaul Murphy, Director of Publishing, The RAND CorporationRobert Kiley, Head of Digital Services, Wellcome LibraryPeter Potter, Director of Publishing Strategy, Virginia Tech
It is commonly asserted that superluminal particle motion can enable backward time travel, but little has been written providing details. It is shown here that the simplest example of a “closed loop” event – a twin paradox scenario where a single spaceship both traveling out and returning back superluminally – does not result in that ship straightforwardly returning to its starting point before it left. However, a more complicated scenario – one where the superluminal ship first arrives at an intermediate destination moving subluminally – can result in backwards time travel. This intermediate step might seem physically inconsequential but is shown to break Lorentz-invariance and be oddly tied to the sudden creation of a pair of spacecraft, one of which remains and one of which annihilates with the original spacecraft.