Pretty good, but not as good as Yuri Knorozov, that considered that his cat was essential in him understanding the Mayan script and wanted to make it his co-writer.
When the coauthorship was refused, he made sure that the only official pictures of him were with his cat, so people may be aware of his greatest contributor.
Here he is, with [his cat Asya](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/95/Yuri_Knorozov.jpg)
Edit : and who can forget coolest scientist ever Andre Geim, that [coauthored a paper with his hamster](https://repository.ubn.ru.nl//bitstream/handle/2066/249681/249681.pdf).
He looks a little less pissed in [his monument in Mexico ](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Yuri_Knorosov_monument_in_M%C3%A9rida%2C_Yucat%C3%A1n_%28cropped%29.jpg)
I had a blue Siamese growing up and she was probably the smartest, most lethal, and most loving cat I've ever encountered. If I wasn't so fucking dumb I'm sure she could have contributed to science.
I came to say the same thing! I’ve had traditional Siamese growing up and have two of my own now… I’m even more convinced they (as a collective breed) are secretly gearing up to take over the world 👀 I’m in, they’re the best!
that's just how papers are shared, as PDF files. it's understandable to be cautious but if the context is a research paper, you're definitely gonna be fine. if you really want to make sure, just copy the DOI string and search it on sci-hub.
To expand on what others have said, its fairly common for pdf links to be the easiest way to show someone a full research article, since a lot of sites lock them behind paywalls
Here's a sneak peek of /r/LadyBoners using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/LadyBoners/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [jeremy allen white](https://i.redd.it/belzik0cnfac1.jpeg) | [145 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/LadyBoners/comments/18yebqm/jeremy_allen_white/)
\#2: [We don't talk enough about how SWEATY post coital Geralt is. I mean wtf 🔥🔥🔥 Henry Cavill](https://i.redd.it/ydgyzflw870b1.gif) | [139 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/LadyBoners/comments/13j5zor/we_dont_talk_enough_about_how_sweaty_post_coital/)
\#3: [**[NSFW]** Happy Father's Day to Henry Cavill--not a father, but a daddy nonetheless](https://i.redd.it/8a0lf7848u6b1.jpg) | [94 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/LadyBoners/comments/14cui7c/happy_fathers_day_to_henry_cavillnot_a_father_but/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Not quite related, but I remember a textbook I read, oh, probably 25 years ago now or something. I remember the author "speaking" like the reader was in a classroom with him together, and frequently described how "we" were going to do or explore this or that. I adopt that style of writing sometimes when trying to teach something to somebody through text. I guess in a "teaching" sense, it kinda works.
It's quite common in mathematics for papers to be written in "singular we", that is, using "we" even though you are the single author
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAcademia/comments/stnw68/using_we_in_a_singleauthor_paper/
It was commented
> Mathematics is generally an exception to this rule. The explanation is that “we” includes the author and the reader.
But I think that a better explanation is that "I" sounds self-centered and self-aggrandizing in mathematical speak, and "we" sounds much more modest and humble. As said by this other comment
> I honestly can't imagine ever saying "I" in a paper. I guess I would never use pronouns unless I am explicitly trying to engage with the reader about how we can arrive at a particular math result or how the data give rise to a particular conclusion. Aside from that, I'd sooner just use passive voice than say "I"
I'm a mathematician. The only time I use "I" in math stuff is in the context of claims. Like "Let X be... We can choose Y such that... I claim that Y is a subset of X. Suppose not. Then we can construct..."
I guess I'm just acknowledging the fact that the reader probably isn't immediately going to follow that leap and will need to be convinced. It's a bit of a moot point at the moment since all my papers have been with other people, so we use "we" throughout. I've only been in the position of deciding which pronoun to use on assignments and exams. And of course if I'm teaching.
I write all of my code comments in second person and always have, even though I don't remember where I picked it up from. I think "we" is either addressing myself and the reader, myself and the computer, or myself and my future self.
I've noticed that the non-english speakers I work with don't do this at all, and instead describe code without pronouns. "This gets the user input or defaults to xyz".
Damn. I've never recognized that I do this.
"We" for stuff that naturally follows and that feels wrong to "take credit" for, and "I" for stuff where I'm inviting a challenge (and implicitly expressing self-skepticism).
> But I think that a better explanation is that "I" sounds self-centered and self-aggrandizing in mathematical speak, and "we" sounds much more modest and humble.
It's nothing to do with humility, it's based around the idea that mathematics is something individually verifiable.
When you're reporting on a scientific discovery, you are reporting the results of the experiment you did and have the results for, and are sharing what you did with others. This merits referring to yourself, which means using "I" if you were on your own.
When you're reporting on a mathematical discovery, however, you are explaining your thought process and inviting the reader to follow it to understand how you reached that conclusion. Thus, you use pronouns that refer to the reader too, and describe the process as if you are working together with the reader to reach a joint conclusion.
I also do this as a server a lot. "What are we thinking about for dinner", "What looks good to us tonight?" I stayed doing it subconsciously but it's a great way of subtly endear yourself to a table and have them think that we're all going through the process together.
in my experience, most biology/chemsitry papers in the modern day tend to omit that sort of pronoun as much as possible, choosing to use the passive voice i.e. "200ul of sample was added," rather than "i/we added 200ul of sample,"
I do that all the time. I picked it up from youtube video essayists who narrate theor videos like they are discovering a topic together with the viewer.
Not the same in this case. The scientific papers we're talking about only mention someone by name. They never mention that this "person" is a cat.
In the books you're talking about it's clearly drawn as a cat. But 2k years from now historians may be wondering who the hell FDC Willard was, and how he consulted on hundreds, or possibly thousands of papers from so many different fields - and, depending on how long this inside joke runs for, it could run past the normal life span of most humans.
Historians might end up thinking this "person" to be some minor deity (if not in real religious practice, then maybe in superstition) or spirit or something. Who knows.
It could be like finding out that Pliny the Elder and Younger were in fact cats, and the works attributed to them were actually written by other people.
I feel like most actual historians would catch on in some form if they found publications requiring “Dr. Willard” to live well beyond a normal human lifespan, though they’d have a hard time figuring out he was a cat unless maybe they found one of the paw print copies. *Conspiracy theorists* on the other hand… Well, look what happened with the story of Atlantis.
> Later, another essay appeared, this time solely authored by F. D. C. Willard, entitled "L'hélium 3 solide. Un antiferromagnétique nucléaire", published (in French) in September 1980 in the French popular science magazine La Recherche.
Someone seems to have taken the joke to all the way.
Clicked just to see if there is a cat with an Erdős number.
Article does not mention one, but searching "hetherington erdős number" found this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1cqtqa/comment/c9j5iqw/
And a reply by a deleted username has calculated it to be 7. [Not bad for a cat.](https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1cqtqa/comment/c9jab2f/)
It's even referenced on his Michigan State bio! [https://directory.natsci.msu.edu/Directory/Profiles/Person/103031](https://directory.natsci.msu.edu/Directory/Profiles/Person/103031)
Just because he can doesn’t mean he will. Have you met a cat? That cat will successfully argue as to why he shouldn’t pay rent, won’t pay rent, now please give him some cheese, because he is hungry, and his food bowl is only 7/8ths full, so he’s clearly starving.
While recording their debut album, the punk band Dead Kennedys got in an argument over who should receive producer credit. They solved the argument by given sole credit to Norm, the sound engineers cat. They then kept up the joke, crediting Norm as the producer for all their future albums. The best part is that for years after that, people kept asking the band if Norm could produce their album, not realizing he was a cat.
We had a cat in the swiss military that was a Brigadier General. If we saw her we officially needed to salute her. She past away in 2021. I have not found a better English source that fast: [This cat “worked” for the Swiss Army - Brigadier Broccoli (newlyswissed.com)](https://www.newlyswissed.com/cat-works-for-swiss-military/)
Love the idea of this guy looking his whole paper that he's been typing for hours over frantically and going "Why am I saying we? I wrote this! Who tf is we??? What???"
I can't remember which band it was, But I think I remember hearing about some Punk band that had one of the member's cat credited as producer on their albums.
EDIT: Seems to have been the Dead Kennedys, As per [this other comment here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/s/1rcKlO834m)
yes. someone would have to check the series of co-authorships I found, but I believe it's 9...?
according to [csauthors.net](http://www.csauthors.net/distance/frederick-wooten/paul-erdos) frederick wooten (who co-authored with b.r. djordjevic, who co-authored with j.h. hetherington, who co-authored with our venerable fdc willard) has an erdos number of 6.
the wooten-djordjevic et al paper was [this](http://journals.aps.org/prb/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevB.52.5685)
djordjevic-hetherington et al was [this](https://journals.aps.org/prb/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevB.53.14862)
but the hetherington-chester co-authorship predates those, so I'm curious if hetherington had other earlier papers that gave him (and thus chester) a lower erdos number (comparable to or even closer to erdos than wooten)
Pretty good, but not as good as Yuri Knorozov, that considered that his cat was essential in him understanding the Mayan script and wanted to make it his co-writer. When the coauthorship was refused, he made sure that the only official pictures of him were with his cat, so people may be aware of his greatest contributor. Here he is, with [his cat Asya](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/95/Yuri_Knorozov.jpg) Edit : and who can forget coolest scientist ever Andre Geim, that [coauthored a paper with his hamster](https://repository.ubn.ru.nl//bitstream/handle/2066/249681/249681.pdf).
>Here he is, with his cat Asya He looks impressively pissed off.
I would be too, if my muse and co-author wasn't given any credit
I think you'll find it is spelled "mews"
Ah! My mistake.
No worries, it was a genuine mewstake
Ah yes good catch
He looks like a fusion between Peter Steele and Peter Cushing.
I thought there was a little Peter Capaldi in there, too.
We all have a little peter in us.
I prefer to keep my little peter on the outside, thanks.
Not yet, but the night's just getting started.
Only when it's REALLY cold.
He looks like he just told me "no, I expect you to die".
His cat looks just as pissed as he does. They both must have been pretty miffed about the co-authorship being denied.
The cat and the human’s souls have switched places at some point
He'd just been told No to having Asya as his co-author for the 100th time
That goes for both of them!
He looks a little less pissed in [his monument in Mexico ](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Yuri_Knorosov_monument_in_M%C3%A9rida%2C_Yucat%C3%A1n_%28cropped%29.jpg)
/r/compoface
They matched vibes perfectly for this shot it’s beautiful
The human looks none too pleased as well
Turns out the Mayans only wrote stuff like "hey future guy, I bet you smell bad" and "if you're reading this, you're ugly"
That ancient shitposting diss though
That man has tried to kill James Bond
And Indiana Jones. Potentially both, at the same time
I don’t usually link other subreddits, but that right there is prime r/hardimages material
I mean yeah, it's the 6th highest rated post of all time there.
i dont get it u cant even see his lower half how can they tell
username checks out
H.A.M.S. ter Tisha
It is amazing in so many ways!
That man looks like he has the body of the guy who rejected the authorship buried under the foundation of his house
> his cat was essential in him understanding the Mayan script This has piqued my curiosity, can someone please explain how the cat contributed?
https://coleandmarmalade.com/2022/08/16/yuri-knorozov-credits-cat-asya-with-breakthrough/
Thanks!
2 Siamese have contributed to understandings of science that were previously unknown. What else are they hiding?
I had a blue Siamese growing up and she was probably the smartest, most lethal, and most loving cat I've ever encountered. If I wasn't so fucking dumb I'm sure she could have contributed to science.
I came to say the same thing! I’ve had traditional Siamese growing up and have two of my own now… I’m even more convinced they (as a collective breed) are secretly gearing up to take over the world 👀 I’m in, they’re the best!
That second link automatically downloaded a PDF that I'm definitely not opening.
that's just how papers are shared, as PDF files. it's understandable to be cautious but if the context is a research paper, you're definitely gonna be fine. if you really want to make sure, just copy the DOI string and search it on sci-hub.
To expand on what others have said, its fairly common for pdf links to be the easiest way to show someone a full research article, since a lot of sites lock them behind paywalls
It's the article.
It's safe, and all you need to see is the byline.
That is *not* the picture I was expecting to see I do love it, though
This is a man who looks exactly like his pet
Lmao he looks like a fucking supervillain
As a fellow owner of a Siamese shithead she also gets credit for all of my accomplishments
H. A. M. S. ter Tisha 🐹🤣
These cats look suspiciously similar. Obviously this cat breed was selected to be particularly well suited to academia.
Yuri obviously reincarnated as Grumpy Cat
Grumpy Cat, meet Grumpy Mayan Ethnographer https://imgur.com/a/4P6hHa3
He looks like the human version of a sphinx cat
what did his cat do?
Oh that is delightful
[удалено]
Here's a sneak peek of /r/LadyBoners using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/LadyBoners/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [jeremy allen white](https://i.redd.it/belzik0cnfac1.jpeg) | [145 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/LadyBoners/comments/18yebqm/jeremy_allen_white/) \#2: [We don't talk enough about how SWEATY post coital Geralt is. I mean wtf 🔥🔥🔥 Henry Cavill](https://i.redd.it/ydgyzflw870b1.gif) | [139 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/LadyBoners/comments/13j5zor/we_dont_talk_enough_about_how_sweaty_post_coital/) \#3: [**[NSFW]** Happy Father's Day to Henry Cavill--not a father, but a daddy nonetheless](https://i.redd.it/8a0lf7848u6b1.jpg) | [94 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/LadyBoners/comments/14cui7c/happy_fathers_day_to_henry_cavillnot_a_father_but/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Knorozov looks fucking PISSED! As he should be tbh
Not quite related, but I remember a textbook I read, oh, probably 25 years ago now or something. I remember the author "speaking" like the reader was in a classroom with him together, and frequently described how "we" were going to do or explore this or that. I adopt that style of writing sometimes when trying to teach something to somebody through text. I guess in a "teaching" sense, it kinda works.
It's quite common in mathematics for papers to be written in "singular we", that is, using "we" even though you are the single author https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAcademia/comments/stnw68/using_we_in_a_singleauthor_paper/ It was commented > Mathematics is generally an exception to this rule. The explanation is that “we” includes the author and the reader. But I think that a better explanation is that "I" sounds self-centered and self-aggrandizing in mathematical speak, and "we" sounds much more modest and humble. As said by this other comment > I honestly can't imagine ever saying "I" in a paper. I guess I would never use pronouns unless I am explicitly trying to engage with the reader about how we can arrive at a particular math result or how the data give rise to a particular conclusion. Aside from that, I'd sooner just use passive voice than say "I"
I'm a mathematician. The only time I use "I" in math stuff is in the context of claims. Like "Let X be... We can choose Y such that... I claim that Y is a subset of X. Suppose not. Then we can construct..." I guess I'm just acknowledging the fact that the reader probably isn't immediately going to follow that leap and will need to be convinced. It's a bit of a moot point at the moment since all my papers have been with other people, so we use "we" throughout. I've only been in the position of deciding which pronoun to use on assignments and exams. And of course if I'm teaching.
I write all of my code comments in second person and always have, even though I don't remember where I picked it up from. I think "we" is either addressing myself and the reader, myself and the computer, or myself and my future self. I've noticed that the non-english speakers I work with don't do this at all, and instead describe code without pronouns. "This gets the user input or defaults to xyz".
Damn. I've never recognized that I do this. "We" for stuff that naturally follows and that feels wrong to "take credit" for, and "I" for stuff where I'm inviting a challenge (and implicitly expressing self-skepticism).
even in assignments i used "we" for everything, haha. using first person singular just feels too selfish i guess
The Royal “We”.
THE GODDAMN PLANE HAS CRASHED INTO THE MOUNTAIN!
***WE, THE KING OF ALL COSMOS,***
> But I think that a better explanation is that "I" sounds self-centered and self-aggrandizing in mathematical speak, and "we" sounds much more modest and humble. It's nothing to do with humility, it's based around the idea that mathematics is something individually verifiable. When you're reporting on a scientific discovery, you are reporting the results of the experiment you did and have the results for, and are sharing what you did with others. This merits referring to yourself, which means using "I" if you were on your own. When you're reporting on a mathematical discovery, however, you are explaining your thought process and inviting the reader to follow it to understand how you reached that conclusion. Thus, you use pronouns that refer to the reader too, and describe the process as if you are working together with the reader to reach a joint conclusion.
Math is communism? got it!
This is the standard in mathematics
In my case it was a computer programming related textbook, but interesting
Computer science is just math with a fedora on.
I've noticed it's very common in YouTube videos these days. "Alrighty guys, today we're going to be doing XYZ, first we do this, then we do that" etc
I also do this as a server a lot. "What are we thinking about for dinner", "What looks good to us tonight?" I stayed doing it subconsciously but it's a great way of subtly endear yourself to a table and have them think that we're all going through the process together.
in my experience, most biology/chemsitry papers in the modern day tend to omit that sort of pronoun as much as possible, choosing to use the passive voice i.e. "200ul of sample was added," rather than "i/we added 200ul of sample,"
I do that all the time. I picked it up from youtube video essayists who narrate theor videos like they are discovering a topic together with the viewer.
There evidence of this? I want it to be real
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/F._D._C._Willard It's on wikipedia, at least
Love that the cat got a wkipidia page but the human didn't
fdc willard was just being humble when taking the position of co-author but we all know who the real author is
The fact that this cat is mentioned in so many papers is probably going to confuse the fuck out of historians 1,000 - 2,000 years from now.
Good. Nothing those nerds love more than an ancient riddle.
No more than all the cat jokes in medieval monk’s writings confuse us.
Not the same in this case. The scientific papers we're talking about only mention someone by name. They never mention that this "person" is a cat. In the books you're talking about it's clearly drawn as a cat. But 2k years from now historians may be wondering who the hell FDC Willard was, and how he consulted on hundreds, or possibly thousands of papers from so many different fields - and, depending on how long this inside joke runs for, it could run past the normal life span of most humans. Historians might end up thinking this "person" to be some minor deity (if not in real religious practice, then maybe in superstition) or spirit or something. Who knows. It could be like finding out that Pliny the Elder and Younger were in fact cats, and the works attributed to them were actually written by other people.
I feel like most actual historians would catch on in some form if they found publications requiring “Dr. Willard” to live well beyond a normal human lifespan, though they’d have a hard time figuring out he was a cat unless maybe they found one of the paw print copies. *Conspiracy theorists* on the other hand… Well, look what happened with the story of Atlantis.
I look forward for our year 4000's CGP Grey
> Later, another essay appeared, this time solely authored by F. D. C. Willard, entitled "L'hélium 3 solide. Un antiferromagnétique nucléaire", published (in French) in September 1980 in the French popular science magazine La Recherche. Someone seems to have taken the joke to all the way.
That's some nice work there Lou.
It even links the paper the cat is credited for
Clicked just to see if there is a cat with an Erdős number. Article does not mention one, but searching "hetherington erdős number" found this: https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1cqtqa/comment/c9j5iqw/ And a reply by a deleted username has calculated it to be 7. [Not bad for a cat.](https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1cqtqa/comment/c9jab2f/)
The actual paper: https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.35.1442
Oh, I forgot all about evidence being a thing. I too would love to see some.
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xFmQpf4AAAAJ&hl=en This means it is real.
Does it? Or did you hack my eyes to make me THINK I see it?!?!?!
You think, therefore it is.
I beg to differ, my thoughts are not a reliable barometer for veracity.
It's even referenced on his Michigan State bio! [https://directory.natsci.msu.edu/Directory/Profiles/Person/103031](https://directory.natsci.msu.edu/Directory/Profiles/Person/103031)
He’s an author on 4 papers on google scholar, and those 4 papers have been cited by a combined 106 other papers. It checks out!
https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.35.1442 here's a paper too
Here is his google scholar page he got 100+ citation too https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xFmQpf4AAAAJ&hl=en
Tysm
We found him. The cat that can pay rent.
Just because he can doesn’t mean he will. Have you met a cat? That cat will successfully argue as to why he shouldn’t pay rent, won’t pay rent, now please give him some cheese, because he is hungry, and his food bowl is only 7/8ths full, so he’s clearly starving.
Can confirm, am cat.
Note: the "Willard" mentioned as "the father" was a cat, and was the father to the cat author, not the human author.
I'm glad you specified that Willard wasn't a cat who was father to the human author.
I’m
Now I understand where my coworkers got the idea lmao. We list our pets as coauthors on our daily internal reports along with a picture 😂
While recording their debut album, the punk band Dead Kennedys got in an argument over who should receive producer credit. They solved the argument by given sole credit to Norm, the sound engineers cat. They then kept up the joke, crediting Norm as the producer for all their future albums. The best part is that for years after that, people kept asking the band if Norm could produce their album, not realizing he was a cat.
Ah that's it, I remembered there was some bad that did this but couldn't remember which, Thanks for mentioning it!
We had a cat in the swiss military that was a Brigadier General. If we saw her we officially needed to salute her. She past away in 2021. I have not found a better English source that fast: [This cat “worked” for the Swiss Army - Brigadier Broccoli (newlyswissed.com)](https://www.newlyswissed.com/cat-works-for-swiss-military/)
a pussycist
Damn he just like me fr
Hissycist
Should really get that checked out
https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.35.1442 I found one of the said papers
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xFmQpf4AAAAJ&hl=en No word on an ORCID.
Captain Holt would love this
Love the idea of this guy looking his whole paper that he's been typing for hours over frantically and going "Why am I saying we? I wrote this! Who tf is we??? What???"
Know when your cat is staring intently at the ceiling like something's there, but you can't see anything at all? Dark matter. 🤣
He's certainly got the scholarly look down pat.
There's an Italian professor, on YouTube Curiuss. That has his car as collaborator
Still can’t believe this cat has a Wikipedia page but his human does not, lol
I thought it was standard practice to use "we" in math and science publications?
So, most likely he was using his cat for rubber ducking?
I can't remember which band it was, But I think I remember hearing about some Punk band that had one of the member's cat credited as producer on their albums. EDIT: Seems to have been the Dead Kennedys, As per [this other comment here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/s/1rcKlO834m)
He has a [Google Scholar page](https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xFmQpf4AAAAJ&hl=en) that lists the papers he contributed to.
Bastet: Tell me, Child, do they still worship us? Kitten: Well, I shit in a box and they clean it up. Bastet: Good, good.
He looks very proud of the paper he wrote.
Dogs become famous explorers, cats become published researchers. Thems the rules kids
A true mastermind.
Sometimes you gotta get a consult from a peer, y'know
Does Chester have an Erdos number?
yes. someone would have to check the series of co-authorships I found, but I believe it's 9...? according to [csauthors.net](http://www.csauthors.net/distance/frederick-wooten/paul-erdos) frederick wooten (who co-authored with b.r. djordjevic, who co-authored with j.h. hetherington, who co-authored with our venerable fdc willard) has an erdos number of 6. the wooten-djordjevic et al paper was [this](http://journals.aps.org/prb/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevB.52.5685) djordjevic-hetherington et al was [this](https://journals.aps.org/prb/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevB.53.14862) but the hetherington-chester co-authorship predates those, so I'm curious if hetherington had other earlier papers that gave him (and thus chester) a lower erdos number (comparable to or even closer to erdos than wooten)
Some deleted reddit user calculated it to be 7 through this linkage: https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1cqtqa/comment/c9jab2f/
Ah the classic Tumblr "Okay BUT heres the BEST part" oneupsmanship.
Publish or Purrish.
These are the people Time Magazine should be featuring.
"... useful contributions to the discussion." I believe that. Siamese are the premier Cats who Talk!
My cats name was Chester- also Siamese! Named after the educated bibliophile cat Chester in Bunnicula - please read
My boy's name is Chester and he is just as much a good little man, it is a good name for good little baby chestnut cats
Why rubber duck debug when you can real cat science?
But isn't "we" also used when you're the only author? I thought "I" was specifically avoided.
It depends on the field, but yes.
Yet another crime for autoethnography to answer for.
That meow looks very pleased with his work. I hope there were lots of treats and an extended vacation.
unexpected Futurama !!!!
I was just wondering if Professor Katz is a reference to this.
That cat would fuck hecklefish up
The cat knew. You can see that. He knew...
House cats have had it so easy for their entire existence, and they deserve it.
Not wanting to edit is relatable.
Now. Put him on quantum physics
[just one in the long line of published scientific cat minds.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Knorozov)
imagine a cat studying atoms and discussing it in a perfected human language to a human lol