We came across your contribution entitled <name of your paper here> published in <journal name here> and thought your expertise would be an excellent fit for <name of this unrelated – to your specialty – congress>.
We invite you as speaker at <full name of congress with dates>.
It is becoming a new form of either spamming or phishing (I still haven’t decided yet) or actually maybe a combination of both, especially that most seem to come from meeting organizers on topics that are completely unrelated to my field of expertise for the said meeting. I now received 7-10 of such invitations per week.
One of the problem with going digital is that something you get stuck with a need to jot down notes or drawing but you do not carry a pen anymore. In fact, carrying pen seems even less likely than wearing a watch nowadays.
If you travel once a in while, getting stuck with custom forms but no pen is also another a common situation that you either saw or lived.
So I decided sometimes ago to search for a dependable, robust, portable but also conformable writing tool that would fit a wallet without adding to its “thickness”. Read the rest of this entry
An interesting reads at TechCrunch on new forms of dissemination and measurements of scientific impact: Reputation Metrics Startups Aim To Disrupt The Scientific Journal Industry.
In a similar vein, you might want to read the excellent editorial by John R. Alder from Stanford entitled “A New Age of Peer Reviewed Scientific Journals” published in the open access journal Surgical Neurology International. The manuscript is available on Cureus blog.
Most of the crackpot papers which are submitted to The Physical Review are rejected, not because it is impossible to understand them, but because it is possible. Those which are impossible to understand are usually published. When the great innovation appears, it will almost certainly be in a muddled, incomplete and confusing form. To the discoverer himself it will be only half-understood; to everybody else it will be a mystery. For any speculation which does not at first glance look crazy, there is no hope.
In an era when most research efforts are publicly funded through federal, provincial and other government programs, open-access journals seem a natural “public” return on the initial investments. However, the existence of various levels of “open” (which also dictate how the results can be re-used) appears to blur the issue. Concerned researchers or simply interested science followers, here is an interesting read in Nature: Researchers opt to limit uses of open-access publications : Nature News & Comment.