From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/4706 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Patrik Eklund Newsgroups: gmane.science.mathematics.categories Subject: Re: Science Citation Index Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 08:06:29 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: Reply-To: Patrik Eklund NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1241020119 14476 80.91.229.2 (29 Apr 2009 15:48:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:48:39 +0000 (UTC) To: categories@mta.ca Original-X-From: rrosebru@mta.ca Thu Dec 4 11:19:38 2008 -0400 Return-path: Envelope-to: categories-list@mta.ca Delivery-date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 11:19:38 -0400 Original-Received: from Majordom by mailserv.mta.ca with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1L8Fth-0005Hc-Ao for categories-list@mta.ca; Thu, 04 Dec 2008 11:13:45 -0400 Original-Sender: categories@mta.ca Precedence: bulk X-Keywords: X-UID: 10 Original-Lines: 55 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.science.mathematics.categories:4706 Archived-At: Probably is and probably isn't. I wrote a paper some years ago which eventually was published and the journal is SCI listed. Our paper contained some keyword like monads and n-categories and stuff, and we liked the paper, we still do. The reviewers didn't always, but the editor eventually took the decision. In correspondence with the editor it was like "... even if only a few in the world will understand, it is not a reason not to publish ...". I should say that the editor (thanks again!, if you read this, and my apologies for using our correspondence as an example) saw the potential for applications as well, which the reviewers did not. Once in a while I communicate within the most theoretical communicates. I feel humble and I realize how little I know, and I want to build upon that. On the other hand, I want to build things that are useful, that improves the world around me a little bit further. And I want to combine the two! Certainly, and please do not stand up and go just yet, certainly categorists are doing great and also very very useful things. But simply, is it enough? Can we do more? Do we reach out? Why are computations efficient? Because we have grids. Why do aeroplanes fly. Because we have matrices. And so on. It would be nice to hear something like: How did we save global economy? With categories. By the way, can anyone point at some category theory success stories, that could be explained in evening news? Patrik On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, John Baez wrote: > Dear category theorists - > > Thomson Scientific runs the well-known "Science Citation Index", which > "provides researchers, administrators, faculty, and students with quick, > powerful access to the bibliographic and citation information they need to > find relevant, comprehensive research data". I believe data from this index > is used in tenure and promotion decisions at some universities. > > I just heard that "Theory and Applications of Categories" and "Cahiers" are > not listed on the Science Citation Index, while - for example - Elsevier's > journal "Homeopathy" is listed there. > > Is this true? Is there some way to improve the situation? > > Best, > jb > >