Schrodinger's Cat Strikes Back

Home » Community » How to promote Physics Overflow?

How to promote Physics Overflow?

I admit that this may look a bit premature, as we do not yet have a site online (however we are testing offline) … 😉

But to quickly get a viable and large enough community right from the start when we go online, it can help to think about in advance how the site can be made known to people who could be interested in it. As I have just learned, it is indeed important to attract the right people to the site right from the start.

In addition, among the interested people there might be some who would like to help with getting the site started, such as taking part in important discussions and polls, give advice about what additionaly has to be considered, help with technical issues, etc …, too.  A notorious still open problem is for example where we can find hosting. 

So to increase the number of participants in the start-up discussions here, it can be a good idea to even promote the fact that we are starting a new higher-level physics site and are serious about it, before actually having it  🙂

So this post is meant to gather promotion ideas, names of potentially interested contributors or places where we can look for them, etc  in the comments.

I compilation of lists of potentially interested people who can be noted explicitly, has already been started by Dimension10 . So I’ll put them down here and complement them a bit in the course of time.

People pingable at Physics SE

– user12811
– Urs Schreiber
– Trimok
– Trung Phan
– Idear
– user26143
– Michael Brown
– David Bar Moshe
– Philip Gibbs
– Jerry Schrimer
– John Rennie
– joshphysics
– Joe Fitzmons
– annav
– user23660
– user6818
– Drake
– user27494
A friendly helper
– Pratuysh
– Prahar
– user10001
– Dushya
– John McVirgo
– Federico Carta
– Matt Reece
– Vibert
– Twistor59
– Wet Savaanna Animal aka Rod Vance
– User 1504
– innisfree
– Danu
– ungerade
– levitopher
– Jonathan Gleason
– Sebastien Palcoux
– dbrane
– lurscher
– Ryan Thorngren
– Peter Morgan
– Heidar
– QuantumDot
– Ivan Velenik
– truebeliever1234
– Mitchell Porter
– Olof
– jose-figueroa-ofarrill
– piotr warchol
– zohar-ko
– user12345
– piotr migdal
– Peter Shor
– Magpie
– Oaoa
– Pavel Safranov
– Arivero
– ramanujan-dirac

– Frederic Brünner
– shouldknowbetter
– BebopButUnsteady
– K-boy
– Edward Hughes
– greg-graviton
– Axion
– user1708
– Bru
Yuji
– Peter Kravchuk
– knives (the n here should be a \eta)
– gidom-mera
– user12103
– loony-physics-crank

– Neuneck
– natanael
– Pulsar
– Craig Thone
– Anthonny
– jdm
– toot
– lionelbrits
– nowyougettolearnwhataheadis
– dingo-d
– dj-mummy
– Art Brown
– B. Y
– nivalth
– stan-liou
– Michael
– user40276

People no longer active on Physics SE

pho
Squark
– Moshe (user566)
– Deepak Vaid/space_cadet (user346)
– Ben Crowell
– Ron Maimon
– Arnold Neumaier
– Lawrence B. Crowell

– Pratik Dioghare
– Marek

People outside Physics SE

– Arvind Rajaraman (Lubos mentioned he started sci.phys.strings with him and Urs Schreiber)
– Hendrik van Hees

– Xiao (the CMT/String Net person)

– Terry Tao (appears to be quite active on various other physics q and a sites and forums.)

– All the great people at TRF
– Suresh Govindarajan (sgovindarajan.wikidot.com)

– Bernd Sonne
– MathOverflow people active in the nice physics tags  they have there
– All the (non-trolling 😉 !) physics bloggers listed in Knemo’s Uduality blog ?
– People who have comitted to the Area51 TP proposal

When it is time, we should also try to unfreeze this chat room to alert TP people
Advertisements

136 Comments

  1. […] beginning we will have to deal with the handicap that there is not yet a  large community (or  promotion of the site will have to work exceptionally well) and many or most of us will not yet have the rep […]

  2. Dilaton says:

    I think when we are online we should our site also promote here, it that room can be unfrozen:

    http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/1350/theoretical-physics

  3. Dilaton says:

    And we should contact John Fitzsimmons because he gave the following answer to the TP meta question

    Where do we go from here?

    As I mention in the comments above, I would be happy to set up such a site if people are interested. I don’t mind paying for hosting and using one of the available Q&A systems. The only question is whether there is interest in such a move.

    It would have potential advantages in being run by the physics community, rather than the more diverse interests in the stack exchange network.

    If you think this is worth doing please let me know, either here or on G+ or by email.

    If it is something we want to do, then my suggestion would be that I could contact various interested people (the ex mods from here, some high rep users etc.) and we could figure out what platform we wanted to go with, and how to structure such a site.

    I am not sure, if we should contact him very soon (the TP people could take part in our discussions 🙂 …) or only after the site is running, such that they can join if they want to?

  4. Dilaton says:

    levitopher

    And he seems to have a nice blog too, even though Lumo would probably not approve all his research interests 😉

    http://levitopher.wordpress.com/

  5. Dilaton says:

    Stringpheno

    http://physics.stackexchange.com/users/1892/stringpheno?tab=activity

    Such people are the ones who should have the power on Physics SE, and not politicians and knownothings …

  6. Dilaton says:

    High (research?) level and endagered because such questions are ignored by the crowd today:

    http://physics.stackexchange.com/q/89324/2751

  7. Dilaton says:

    http://physics.stackexchange.com/users/17137/brianwa

    He has given a nice answer to one of my question, asking if the twistor (now amplituhedron) approach to calculate scattering amplitudes can be usefule in renormalization calculations too … 🙂

  8. http://physics.stackexchange.com/users/28355/sanath-devalapurkar

    I think that many of his questions and answers are extremely endangered by the non-mainstream policy…

    • Dilaton says:

      I will see that I can import them, he seems to be slightly interested in a “broader notion” of quantum gravity I have seen when following the link in his profile and looking at his institute :-). To me it seems perfectly legitimate mainstream theoretical physics, if you dont ask Lumo … 😛

      But of course we both know that the current crop of most active reviewers is not able to discern between legitimat mainstreem physics and crack, just thinking about the attack on Urs Schreiber last year …

  9. Daniel Shawen says:

    Thanks for recognizing the need for this. I’ll never read or write another word on Physics SE.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: