eulers papers would have been considered not

A
Anonymous09/17/26, 06:44No.17055699
Euler’s papers would have been considered not rigorous today and would not have passed peer review
op image
38

Replies

A
Anon09/17/26, 06:49No.17055701
Based
A
Anon09/17/26, 06:52No.17055703
Yes, rigor alwayd is a social protocol because it cannot be defined formally, what's your point?
A
Anon09/17/26, 07:13No.17055717
Thats because jewish scientists invented this "rigorism" to block real creativity. Especially landau in math and pauli in physics.
A
Anon09/17/26, 15:38No.17055903
Euclid’s sandbox was essentially unpublishable in its original form. We call this progress.
A
Anon09/17/26, 15:42No.17055908
Euler would have written them differently had modern publishing standards and frameworks existed at the time, and consequently would have had zero problems getting his findings published.
Reply image .jpg
A
Anon09/17/26, 17:18No.17055984
most of math papers are fixed through AI for 40 dolars + some of you guys are too slothful to type into latex and take ss and send them to AI hence ur argument is debunked.
A
Anon09/17/26, 18:20No.17056022
If Euler was alive today he would be mainstream and you faggots would celebrate some loser faggot who accomplished nothing in your endless pursuit of clout through contrarianism.
A
Anon09/25/26, 19:45No.17061041
Irrelevant. Nobody gives a shit about rigorous formalism and peer review when there is a path into practical applications and therefore monetization.
Reply image .gif
A
Anon09/25/26, 20:18No.17061056
The "airplane" of the Wright brothers wouldn't be certified by aviation authorities today.
A
Anon09/25/26, 20:23No.17061057
Newton's alchemy notes would have been considered pseudoscience in this day and age. Can you believe THAT?
A
Anon09/25/26, 21:02No.17061073
Euler was also psychotically extraverted to the point that he had like 13 children with the same wife and continually mailed out try-me letters in order to shit on people in other countries simply because shitting on the people in his own state and neighborhood wasn't profuse enough. Peer review had nothing to do with it.
Reply image .png
A
Anon09/26/26, 15:59No.17061386
>peer review Peer-review is gay.Proofs:https://www.bitchute.com/video/zR38CtjD__ohttps://www.cremieux.xyz/p/sometimes-papers-contain-obvious?utm_source=publication-searchhttps://www.cremieux.xyz/p/beware-the-man-of-many-studieshttps://www.technotheoria.org/p/why-does-academia-suck?utm_source=publication-searchhttps://humanvarieties.org/2024/11/27/why-academic-papers-abstracts-should-not-be-trusted-and-why-academic-publishing-should-not-be-regulated/https://www.emilkirkegaard.com/p/reverse-publication-bias-a-collection?utm_source=publication-searchhttps://www.emilkirkegaard.com/p/the-role-of-censorship-in-science?utm_source=publication-search
A
Anon09/29/26, 09:41No.17064418
go back to >>>/lit/ [//boards.4chan.org/lit/] now
A
Anon09/29/26, 10:30No.17064451
Not a single penny 100% serious.
A
Anon10/01/26, 02:57No.17065826
anus
A
Anon10/05/26, 06:16No.17068065
/sci/ Standard Operating Procedure. Open catalogue. Scroll down to the lowest Frog poster thread Bump it with some worthless comment Repeat. Do this daily.This message has been brought to you by "The Friends of the Frog"
A
Anon10/07/26, 16:49No.17069426
why do you say that op?
A
Anon10/10/26, 15:41No.17071837
Yes indeed.
A
Anon10/16/26, 14:56No.17075840
It's over /sci/...
A
Anon10/21/26, 23:44No.17078439
bump
A
Anon10/25/26, 02:19No.17080067
I think the opposite, at this point, everything goes for science.