The finite-differencing time-domain method [1] (sometimes also called leap-frog [2]) is easy to implement and robust for scalar and electromagnetic waves. This other book by LeVeque [3] is a great introduction on finite-differencing methods for linear equations.
Matter in neutron stars is compressed together by the enormous gravity. Once set free on your floor, this material would no longer be held together and will start expanding at close to the speed of light. The resulting explosion will probably obliterate the entire continent. A crude way to estimate it is to take into account the fact that the gravitational binding energy of matter at the surface of a neutron star is about 10% of the rest mass energy of the material, so once that material is removed it will liberate as much energy (If I got the numbers right, you get an explosion energy of 0.1 m c^2 ~ 10^13 megatons).
I think this is, at least in part, specific to the US/Western tradition. US physics curriculum is built to get people up to speed with quantum physics ASAP, because this is the core of most physics research in US physics departments. If you look at Landau-Lifshitz's Theoretical Physics curriculum, you will find plenty of classical physics: from fluid dynamics, to elasticity, and plasma physics. For example, Landau-Lifshitz Vol. 6 is an excellent introduction to Navier-Stokes equations and their applications.
RAS used to have all articles available to everyone for free after 1 year (immediately if one wanted to pay for open access). I thought this was a reasonable compromise. The new policy will damage early career researchers and groups at less established institutions that will not be able to publish their own research. I have published a number of papers on MNRAS, but now I will move to other journals. In principle, I can charge the publication costs to my NSF grant, in practice that means I would not be able to send my students to conferences, because research support funding is very stretched (no more than few thousand dollars per year per student). This would damage their career prospects. Theory grants are already very small and adding several thousand dollars extra to the budget can make the difference between the grant being awarded or rejected (it should not be, but this is how it works). Moreover, even at R1 institutions, a lot of theory research is actually not funded by federal grants.
Journals were created to support the scientific community and provide a platform for scientists to discuss. Charging exorbitant publication fees damages the very mission of these journals.
This is interesting, but all of the links I tried were broken or led to broken pages. Unfortunately, with the widespread use of LMSs a lot of useful material is now behind University firewalls.
Coincidentally, Alcubierre recently posted a review article on warp drives: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.05610.pdf. It looks like a good introduction to this topic.
I would also recommend "The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time" by Hawking and Ellis. It uses some advanced mathematics and some prior knowledge of GR, at least at the level of Schutz or Carroll, is needed, but it is a wonderful book to learn about the global structure of spacetimes with black holes, singularity theorems and so on.
Single academics will likely not bother with Office365/Google, but University administrators are the ones buying enterprise software. In the past few years the trend has been for the central administration to push departments to give up their self-hosted mail servers and switch to Office365 (I have witnessed this at three different Universities). My guess is that something like SwiftLatex could sweeten the deal and convince the faculty to support some of these changes.
Exactly. The data is about the backgrounds of data scientists, but is incorrectly interpreted as the probability of becoming a data scientist given a certain background. Obviously the two are related (Bayes' theorem), but to draw any conclusion one would need to know the number of PhDs, Masters, etc. that are applying to become data scientists. For example, the fact that a small fraction of data scientists has a MOOC degree does not imply that the probability of becoming a data scientist if having "only" a MOOC degree is low. For all that we know the few people in the market having this kind of non-traditional preparation could have 100% success rate in getting those jobs.
I am just thinking that, if future archeologists discover these warnings / language in frequent association with art, then they will probably not think twice about excavating an actual nuclear disposal site that exhibits them. They will probably think that the warnings were placed there to scare away thieves.