Plagiarism

F. Copyright
1. Material published online is protected by the same laws that apply to books, videos and music.

2. The copyright in a member’s posts remains with the original author. By posting to sciforums, you give us permission to publish your posts anywhere on the site.

3. It is illegal to copy or republish material from sciforums (or elsewhere on the internet) without the express permission of the copyright owner.

4. Under the laws of many countries, limited quotation of material is permissible in the context of comment, review and/or criticism. This does not in general permit the reproduction in full of complete works (e.g. song lyrics or news articles).

5. Where you reproduce part of a work in a post, you must include a link to the original source, along with appropriate acknowledgement – at a minimum the author’s name and the name of the original publishing source, but consider also supplying the original date of publication and other relevant information (e.g. ‘US shares fall further’ by A.Writer, New York Times, 11 September 2015.)


...............................................................................................

You know, after a while other peoples behaviour rubs off on you. You watch other members make posts on equations, textbook stuff no less, whether in part or whole. Some examples: Relativity is good start. Let's be honest, relastivity as famous as it is is written by such a wide sprectrum of scientists.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2837902#post2837902

I suppose it does not matter how famous an equation is. If you don't cite your equations, it's definate copyright and plaigarism right?

Here is loads more

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2834687#post2834687

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=105796

The latter one here is an interesting case. You have a case where either the equation as a whole is identified, or it can be seen that certain threads might use an equation and describe parts, as was mine. Mine is here

I never actually saw captaincremins later post till yesterday when it was too late to reply

''@Mister
I don't understand these equations, but doing a quick google on them I have found some of them quoted as the work of "a leading scientist in his area of research, Tsao Chang", and using virtually exactly the same phrases.

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/6...irac-equation/''

Well, the answer is ''no'', it is not my work. Ironically, the link is my own work. The beginning briefly covers the (Higgs Mechanism which I admit is not my work, but not done by Tsao anyhow), and the latter part describes some langrangians, which is my work. I can also notice mistakes in there! lol But that was my work he linked to, and the work was demonstrated rewriting langrangians in terms of the Tsao Proper Mass.

Anyway, some more posts where people demonstrate the use of equations and never cites them

If my plaigarism is true then Rpenner is found guilty of massive amounts of it

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2813367#post2813367

I mean there is simply loads of math in there, no doubt none of it was technically worked out!

I have never passed off work that I have presented as my own, unless it really is my own work. I am not a pleigerist. I use equations in here to answer questions just like everyone has in the past.

So how is my case any different than what has been seen at this site? I make one reply to cptbork using some standard equations which describe the Higgs Phenom using Goldstone Bosons, and my post is subjected to that crap behaviour you see off alphanumeric.

I asked james in a PM to have a look, and he said read the site rules, otherwise you are wasting my time... well i KNOW the site the rules. And if I broke them yesterday, well wake-up call, they have been broken hundreds of time by various members.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sorry, said ''mine is here'' without any link

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=111600

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sorry, do you mean plagiarism?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

People avoid plagiarism by clearly indicating that they are posting quotes or ideas from other peoples work. There is no copyright on ideas, so if you are using other people's ideas as your own, you may be guilty of plagiarism without being guilty of copyright infringement.

Personally, I put all quotes in bold or italics, and then a link underneath to the source of the quote.
If the ideas belong to someone else, it is only fair to mention the original thinker and give the person credit for them.

The same goes for Alphanumeric, Rpenner, JamesR, myself, everyone.
If you are using someone else's ideas and presenting them as your own, that is plagiarism.
If you quote someone else's words or calculations without referring back to the original work, then that is copyright infringement.

 

I am guilty of copy-right infringement then, not plagiarism as alphanumeric keeps singing to the choir. It's not fair he misrepresents me as such. From now on I will be careful to give the appropriate citations, but this should be done in every case.

As you mentioned, this includes everyone. If I have been guilty of this ''suspiciously'' only till now, then hundreds of posts here are guilty of such!

 

You can be guilty of both.
I'm simply saying that they are separate considerations.

Definitely if you see someone committing plagiarism, or not referencing quotes,
you should pull them up on it.
But you need proof before you accuse someone.
You can't say that just because someone has a lot of mathematics in a post
that it is not their own.

 

. . . Don't plagiarize my EEMU Hypothesis . . .and . . . . "Don't throw me in dat' der briar patch!" (tee hee)

 

Well generally, I believe most people post math in their posts are just assumed not to be their own. On plenty occassions I have came to the site and manifested some equations for tough peer review. Though I have always warned they are my own. The kind of equations I never warn as my own are the kind I post without reference or citations, often because notable names here have done the same thing on many occassions.

Pulling them up is a different thing however completely. In my case, no one asked for citations, niether did anyone even give me a chance to rebuttal AN's claim I was committing Plagiarism. I have never done it.

The thread was locked and closed with an assortment of accusations, hollow and unjust.

 

(Personally the cite members who are into physics hate it when I talk physics, like the subject should be banned to me or something. Yet they know clearly that I can talk about the subjects they flaunt about and call themselves professionals on.)

 

Well, you are doing things back to front, Mister.
Your own equations, you can just write down without any reference.
Other people's equations, you need to reference.

Of course, that doesn't prevent you when you are writing your own equations to say so, and ask for comments or guidance. If you want to, that is.

Maybe this misunderstanding is why you are continually having problems with other posters, and why you don't seem to understand what their problem is with you.

If they are committing the same faults, ask them to properly reference their stuff.
Alphanumeric should insist on it with them just as he is doing with you.

 

Well, I know that now. I mean, I've always known this, but in a strange sense other posters here only aggrevated that kind of behaviour from me. Too many posts I have seen without reference or citation, only when I saw someone come in with their own work, they said so.

The bolded part

Well, that has a lot to do with being me. When you learn my posts are outside of the general consideration than others are, then others are allowed a bit of freedom, whilst I am to be made an example of.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Oh! I thought he were referrin' to Pleigerism, the act of 'aving survived intimate financial involvement with the Nazi regime and transiting thereby inter respektible businessmanship. Aye, it's all the rage downabouts by me pig pen, wi' one sow an' another accusin' each other o' war profiteering under the guise of honesty piggery an' residenchul protectionism! Afore ye know it, it'll 'ave spread to the chicken coop an it'll be nothin' but anti-Keansian didactics for breakfast.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Pleiger

 

lol... I had a word difficulty... why didn't I use google

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Well, it's a freedom they shouldn't have.

Alpha will probably want to make his own comments on this.
He might disagree that he lets other people make sloppy posts as a favour.

Try to find some proven examples, just like I checked up on your post.
As I said, you can't just have suspicions.

 

That still doesn't spell Pilgerism.

 

I gave examples in my OP. Examples from prometheus, Rpenner and some of the links contained AN's work no less. Each are no more citing than my post was, and any post I make which is outside my own ''theories'' are there for educational values. My point originally that I can speak about these subjects just as much as these poor crabs earning with sweat their degrees.

 

Take the supposed examples from Rpenner.
I don't know if you can track down copied equations, but in his case he intersperses his equations with comments explaining his steps.
If he was plagiarising, he would be easy to catch.
As a self appointed sciforums Private Detective, I've done some searches,
and I can find nothing in his threads which belongs to anyone else.
Your accusation in his case is baseless.
I won't bother looking at the others. You can if you wish.

You can't accuse people of plagiarism without very good grounds.
You are now doing something which will get you into even more trouble.
The mods are being very quiet.
Possibly, you are being allowed enough rope to hang yourself.
I suggest you either provide some proofs, or backtrack immediately.

 

Rpenner is very smart. It was perhaps niave of me to assume he copied his equations from other places. However, just because you cannot trace an equation online does not mean it is not copied. for instance, the post you traced to me was actually by me. Some of the equations to begin with are what I call ''standard equations''. The rest is what I call ''standard calculations'' which will be found but not in the manner I gave which makes them soley mine.

Even if Rpenner is excused for now, too many posts I have read by others linked by me, are prime examples of no one citing their work. Indeed, AN the dirty low life has done himself. Hypocritical BS is what I call it.