Hey Guys, I went over the first 20 pages today. I tried to goto edit mode from review mode, and it said doing so will turn off track changes for all users, so I left it in review mode. I made a bunch of edits but they will likely show up as suggestions requiring review. If anyone else reading it sees them and wants to approve them be my guest. If you'de rather I approve my own suggestions I will go back and approve them all, and going forward will approve all suggestions as I make them unless I'm uncertain about the nature of the change. I added afew notes, for sections where the meaning was unclear to me, so I'de be curious what you guys think he means in those sections, there was an interesting one about shooting stars "from the eagle" that had me scratching my head...
So happy to see this coming together! I would also be happy to help proof read. I will need to buy a copy of office i guess as I currently use libreoffice and it probably have compatability issues. I am intending to read the book in full, but it may take me a month or 2. I purchased his older Japanese book and have a copy here so I may be able to extract material from that if beneficial.
Hey Bob, I'm going to sign up for a 30 day trial too (just so I don't lock up one of your family subscriptions). I have 3 different accounts available, so I can probably go through 90 days of trials. I will email you the email address I used to sign up so you can share whatever document with that account.
If possible can you also comment on the editing style you want us to use. I've never edited before so I want to make sure I try to be consistent with what you were hoping for.
1. Fix only obvious spelling grammar errors caused by OCR
2. Also fix grammar errors in the original paper
3. Also reword awkward wording and potentially change words to what I consider might be more appropriate language.
I'm not sure if it allows it, but given I think each of us is probably going to read the material in it's entirety, perhaps putting mark-up on any changes that fall under 2 but most importantly 3 and then having one other person accept them might be beneficial to ensure I don't change anything inadvertently to alter a higher meaning. As a simple example, in the introduction Matsumoto using the term "Tearing" as in "Nature often shows a tearing at an unexpected place.", I fully understand this word, and it has a very profound meaning as if I had to wager a bet, he realizes this is the exact appropriate word to reflect the nature of this perhaps being a fracture in our reality into a higher dimension of condensed matter. As such although I find the wording awkward here, I would refrain from changing it as I think it has a nuanced meaning on many different levels. There may however be other places in the document where I am unaware of potential nuanced meanings on other levels and thus be tempted to change the wording.
- Very good point about "Tearing", Peter! I was going to make the same point. It's even possible that Matsumoto might have just seen "The Matrix (1999)", when a black cat passing by twice was taken to be a sign of a "Tear" in The Matrix. In any case, I'd also leave it as is but, as you say, be on the lookout for other nuanced terms but erring on the side of "if in doubt do nought" and leaving it to Bob to make the final call (but perhaps leaving an editor's note).
Otherwise, if those first few paragraphs are any criterion, we should all have a pretty straightforward job tidying up: the automatic translation is pretty good - far better than in earlier times.
I agree on the tearing, my exact thought. Of course, Dr. Matsumoto might have seen the Anime "Ghost in the Shell" upon which the matrix is a pretty good facsimile
Bob, I've so-far looked at the comments of Chris and Peter. I see that the common factor is basically Word. I have an older but still pretty comprehensive version, Chris has Word via Office and Peter effectively has it via Libre, which, I think, either Word can read or that can be converted to Microsoft Word via a third-party app.
And I'd venture to guess that any further volunteers will have Word-compatible but not necessarily 365-compatible setups.
So, post-OCR, if the documents can be broken up into Word compatible chunks - fully or partly overlapping - each editor could send back to you his/her own "corrections", still or again in Word-compatible format. OK, that would still mean a huge job for you - splicing them back into full documents and, yes, there'd be "islands" of editing styles which, in the end, you'd have to integrate into your overall style but at least it should save you some time, overall.
How is all this sounding? I'm assuming that you can see to the OCR process entirely yourself by what amounts to a batch processing but let us all know if we could help you there too.
BTW, I've already devoured those opening paragraphs of the PDF and I'm already riveted to the spot. 😎
Also happy to help the proof reading, Bob. I just have an old(er) version of Word but I see that you favour Office 365. I can get that, providing it doesn't cost an arm and a leg.
Hmm, looks like I could get the minimal version free for 6 months but leave me with the fine print, including whether it would, when used for online updating/editing, be compatible with yours.
OK - I see all that. I'm not sure how flexible this sharing arrangement is - whether any of the five can be chopped and changed in the event of one or more of us becoming unavailable due to unforeseen circumstances. But, that said, count me in. I presume we'd be talking, for any given pdf, a single, online document with one or more viewable suggestions editable amongst one or all of us five plus yourself.
PS: I presume that Microsoft legally mean "family" rather than family - i.e. that their Family option is only a suggested way it can typically be used rather than a strictly legal one. If the latter, there'd be big fish hooks.
Enjoyed Matsumoto's elaboration, on p. 75, of the grass circles he witnessed three days in a row after thunderstorms near Sapporo. Says they were 80 cm wide and 20 cm deep, anti-clockwise pattern. He's the only scientist I'm aware of who has made such observations in connection to CF and BL and also says the process that creates such grass circles could be reproduced in a lab. He's just brilliant and fearless.
Hey Guys, I'm a little behind on my editing duties and I'm just playing catch-up. I have afew questions.
1) Am I correct to understand the sections highlighted yellow in the working doc have already been reviewed and had suggestions applied. As in is it better if I don't make any suggestions to these highlighted yellow sections and just read them in the original PDF?
2) I remember reading a comment in the 20-40 section regarding the approach that we might be going to try and ask Matsumoto for the original documents to help us revive the the forumulas as there was some issue accurately recreating them in office 365. Are we holding off on doing forulas until we talk to him.
3) Lastly there was a comment somewhere about "hydrogens" being changed to "hydrogen atoms" on bulk in the document (find and replace I assumed). I've been manually adding correction suggestions for this change where I spot them, hopefully it isn't going to be creating unnecessary comment approval burden.
Highlighted in Yellow is for me to do a review of it. The second large tranche is done.
More work needs to be done on the third tranche.
Matsumoto hasn't got the original digital files - he did not have a computer until recently - I think they were made at University - so diagrams and formulas will have to be re-built. I can re-build them in Office for desktop.
we have not decided yet on the hydrogens question.
awesome bob look forward to this can you send to mrs tanaki in japan ? She us a ambassador I’ll send her email address ok I’ll copy this and send it to a cc to dr tanaka
Hey Guys, I went over the first 20 pages today. I tried to goto edit mode from review mode, and it said doing so will turn off track changes for all users, so I left it in review mode. I made a bunch of edits but they will likely show up as suggestions requiring review. If anyone else reading it sees them and wants to approve them be my guest. If you'de rather I approve my own suggestions I will go back and approve them all, and going forward will approve all suggestions as I make them unless I'm uncertain about the nature of the change. I added afew notes, for sections where the meaning was unclear to me, so I'de be curious what you guys think he means in those sections, there was an interesting one about shooting stars "from the eagle" that had me scratching my head...
Hi Peter, thanks.
Leave the changes for approval by me as I then know what was changed. I have already made a synthetic narration of section 1 and 2 (not 2a and beyond)
When in doubt, check the OCR version against the straight scanned pdf - it may be an OCR error that produced a confusing word.
So happy to see this coming together! I would also be happy to help proof read. I will need to buy a copy of office i guess as I currently use libreoffice and it probably have compatability issues. I am intending to read the book in full, but it may take me a month or 2. I purchased his older Japanese book and have a copy here so I may be able to extract material from that if beneficial.
See my comment above, It looks like I can share my Microsoft 365 Family subscription with you
Hey Bob, I'm going to sign up for a 30 day trial too (just so I don't lock up one of your family subscriptions). I have 3 different accounts available, so I can probably go through 90 days of trials. I will email you the email address I used to sign up so you can share whatever document with that account.
If possible can you also comment on the editing style you want us to use. I've never edited before so I want to make sure I try to be consistent with what you were hoping for.
1. Fix only obvious spelling grammar errors caused by OCR
2. Also fix grammar errors in the original paper
3. Also reword awkward wording and potentially change words to what I consider might be more appropriate language.
I'm not sure if it allows it, but given I think each of us is probably going to read the material in it's entirety, perhaps putting mark-up on any changes that fall under 2 but most importantly 3 and then having one other person accept them might be beneficial to ensure I don't change anything inadvertently to alter a higher meaning. As a simple example, in the introduction Matsumoto using the term "Tearing" as in "Nature often shows a tearing at an unexpected place.", I fully understand this word, and it has a very profound meaning as if I had to wager a bet, he realizes this is the exact appropriate word to reflect the nature of this perhaps being a fracture in our reality into a higher dimension of condensed matter. As such although I find the wording awkward here, I would refrain from changing it as I think it has a nuanced meaning on many different levels. There may however be other places in the document where I am unaware of potential nuanced meanings on other levels and thus be tempted to change the wording.
- Very good point about "Tearing", Peter! I was going to make the same point. It's even possible that Matsumoto might have just seen "The Matrix (1999)", when a black cat passing by twice was taken to be a sign of a "Tear" in The Matrix. In any case, I'd also leave it as is but, as you say, be on the lookout for other nuanced terms but erring on the side of "if in doubt do nought" and leaving it to Bob to make the final call (but perhaps leaving an editor's note).
Otherwise, if those first few paragraphs are any criterion, we should all have a pretty straightforward job tidying up: the automatic translation is pretty good - far better than in earlier times.
I agree on the tearing, my exact thought. Of course, Dr. Matsumoto might have seen the Anime "Ghost in the Shell" upon which the matrix is a pretty good facsimile
Hi Peter,
Wonderful! As I said to Phillip, I think you can get a one month free trial.
I also have the Japanese print book - but you know more about Japanese than I do!
Bob, I've so-far looked at the comments of Chris and Peter. I see that the common factor is basically Word. I have an older but still pretty comprehensive version, Chris has Word via Office and Peter effectively has it via Libre, which, I think, either Word can read or that can be converted to Microsoft Word via a third-party app.
And I'd venture to guess that any further volunteers will have Word-compatible but not necessarily 365-compatible setups.
So, post-OCR, if the documents can be broken up into Word compatible chunks - fully or partly overlapping - each editor could send back to you his/her own "corrections", still or again in Word-compatible format. OK, that would still mean a huge job for you - splicing them back into full documents and, yes, there'd be "islands" of editing styles which, in the end, you'd have to integrate into your overall style but at least it should save you some time, overall.
How is all this sounding? I'm assuming that you can see to the OCR process entirely yourself by what amounts to a batch processing but let us all know if we could help you there too.
BTW, I've already devoured those opening paragraphs of the PDF and I'm already riveted to the spot. 😎
Next 10 pages up
Also happy to help the proof reading, Bob. I just have an old(er) version of Word but I see that you favour Office 365. I can get that, providing it doesn't cost an arm and a leg.
Thanks Phillip. You can get a free one month trial I think. If that does not work, at a push, I could share my account 'with family'
Hmm, looks like I could get the minimal version free for 6 months but leave me with the fine print, including whether it would, when used for online updating/editing, be compatible with yours.
Hi Phillip, I have Microsoft 365 Family and according to the links below, I can share my subscription benefits with up to five people
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/share-your-microsoft-365-family-subscription-b389b9ce-3ae3-4a82-9017-39d79972fcba
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/share-your-microsoft-365-family-subscription-b389b9ce-3ae3-4a82-9017-39d79972fcba#bkmk_shareinstructions
OK - I see all that. I'm not sure how flexible this sharing arrangement is - whether any of the five can be chopped and changed in the event of one or more of us becoming unavailable due to unforeseen circumstances. But, that said, count me in. I presume we'd be talking, for any given pdf, a single, online document with one or more viewable suggestions editable amongst one or all of us five plus yourself.
PS: I presume that Microsoft legally mean "family" rather than family - i.e. that their Family option is only a suggested way it can typically be used rather than a strictly legal one. If the latter, there'd be big fish hooks.
You're a key part of the LENR family
Enjoyed Matsumoto's elaboration, on p. 75, of the grass circles he witnessed three days in a row after thunderstorms near Sapporo. Says they were 80 cm wide and 20 cm deep, anti-clockwise pattern. He's the only scientist I'm aware of who has made such observations in connection to CF and BL and also says the process that creates such grass circles could be reproduced in a lab. He's just brilliant and fearless.
Brilliant. Fearless.
Happy to help proof read Bob. Sign me up.
Thanks Chris, do you have Office 365?
Office yes, 365 no. ;)
Office should do.
See my comment above, It looks like I can share my Microsoft 365 Family subscription with you
Hey Guys, I'm a little behind on my editing duties and I'm just playing catch-up. I have afew questions.
1) Am I correct to understand the sections highlighted yellow in the working doc have already been reviewed and had suggestions applied. As in is it better if I don't make any suggestions to these highlighted yellow sections and just read them in the original PDF?
2) I remember reading a comment in the 20-40 section regarding the approach that we might be going to try and ask Matsumoto for the original documents to help us revive the the forumulas as there was some issue accurately recreating them in office 365. Are we holding off on doing forulas until we talk to him.
3) Lastly there was a comment somewhere about "hydrogens" being changed to "hydrogen atoms" on bulk in the document (find and replace I assumed). I've been manually adding correction suggestions for this change where I spot them, hopefully it isn't going to be creating unnecessary comment approval burden.
Highlighted in Yellow is for me to do a review of it. The second large tranche is done.
More work needs to be done on the third tranche.
Matsumoto hasn't got the original digital files - he did not have a computer until recently - I think they were made at University - so diagrams and formulas will have to be re-built. I can re-build them in Office for desktop.
we have not decided yet on the hydrogens question.
awesome bob look forward to this can you send to mrs tanaki in japan ? She us a ambassador I’ll send her email address ok I’ll copy this and send it to a cc to dr tanaka
Thanks John, I hope many many people will get to see and act on this important work.