<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Cosmic String and Black Hole Limits of Toroidal Vlasov Bodies in General Relativity · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1803.11224/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1803.11224/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Cosmic String and Black Hole Limits of Toroidal Vlasov Bodies in General Relativity — mentioned by ISL</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16740370</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1803.11224:16740370</guid><pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2018 23:20:28 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Some things may be better shown by example. Here&amp;#x27;s the first paper off the top of today&amp;#x27;s submissions to gr-qc: https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.11224 Is it right? How do you know? To whom should you send it in order to get an expert review? Which of those people has an ax to grind with one of the authors? Of the remaining people, who do you think you could convince to invest a day or more to carefully evaluate the paper? Okay, so you got replies back from two of your carefully selected referees (after two months of badgering one of them): Referee A thinks the paper is great, insightful, and…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1803.11224/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>gr-qc</category></item></channel></rss>
