The Observed Inclination Problem: solved at last?

[Pulsar]

As you all know, the biggest problem of observational astronomy is the fact that we observe every object as a projection on the plane of the sky. This makes it very hard to distinguish between foreground and background objects, and to determine the intrinsic shape of extended objects like galaxies (the well-known Inclination Problem).

Now, this paper proposes a revolutionary technique that, if correct, will solve the projection problem once and for all! It is absolutely amazing, and I can only imagine what the consequences will be... I dare say we are on the brink of a new era.

Please, read the paper, it will blow your mind!

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.6167v1

 

[Shaedys]

April Fools, good one though.

I acknowledge the support of my chair in the making of this post.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

Lol. Interestingly, many people think that this is the level of effort requiered to make breaktroughs and revolutionize astronomy.

 

[RigelKentaurusA]

Epic. Just... epic. :lol:

 

[RichardMNixon]

However, we reffer the interested reader to the literature, from which a formal solution can be easily derived.

:evil: :evil: :evil:
I hate that so very, very much.

 

[RigelKentaurusA]

However, we reffer the interested reader to the literature, from which a formal solution can be easily derived.

:evil: :evil: :evil:
I hate that so very, very much.

I took it as part of the joke, or at least not to be taken seriously.
Now if I found that in a real paper, yeah, I would be a little annoyed. Just like citing things to "private communication."

 

[RichardMNixon]

I took it as part of the joke, or at least not to be taken seriously.
Now if I found that in a real paper, yeah, I would be a little annoyed. Just like citing things to "private communication."

Oh I'm sure the authors of the joke paper hate it too, that's why it's in the joke paper. It's even worse than writing "It can obviously be concluded that..." It's unhelpful at best and often just insulting.

 

[RigelKentaurusA]

Ahh, gotcha. I understand now.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

 

[Pulsar]

hehe, April Fools is a tradition among astronomers.
My favourite fake paper is from a few years ago, when someone took the piss out of cosmologists. The author claimed that he had found a new cosmological solution to the Einstein Equation, that matched the CMB observations 'perfectly'. So then he described this "multiply connected manifold" as a combination of a conical cylinder and a torus. It all sounded very sciency, until he showed a picture on the last page... it was a trumpet