Pocket conference crib

courtesy 1994 NOVA school and 1995 YERAC

(Received 19 September 1995)

The everlasting nuisance of all conference participants is: questions. Those who listen (or sleep) have to ask questions, and - much worse - those who give talks must answer them. In order to make their lives easier we present a comprehensive list of typical conference questions with appropriate answers included. We advise to photocopy these pages and keep them with you all the time. It can be very helpful!

Standard questions with answers

This is the list of 41 standard questions to be asked at any talk, regardless of the topic. Answers are also included for speakers convenience.

1. What is the typical time scale?

• That is the typical length over the typical velocity.

2. What are the error bars in this figure?

• I don't make errors.
• We excluded them for clearness.
• Smaller than the symbols.

3. What is the quantity on the x/y axis?

• Can't tell you, buy glasses.

4. What is the role of the magnetic field?

• It complicates things.

5. Are your results consistent with the n-th law of thermodynamics?

• Only in the relativistic limit.

6. What is the typical size?

• Typical time scale times the typical velocity.

7. How did you select your sample?

• Using a Monte Carlo method.

8. What does the "x" mean in your equation?

• It is the unknown variable.

9. What is the role of turbulence in this respect?

• It acts like the magnetic field.
• Aha, you drink black coffee!

10. How realistic are your assumptions?

• I've assumed them to be real.
• Mind your own business.

11. Can these results constrain the value of the Hubble constant?

• Yes, if the distance to the objects is known.

12. Is this object a binary?

• No, but it's companion is.

13. Is this a 1 or 2 sigma result?

• Sleep on, I only have one data point.

14. How does your result compare with the model of Chebnyakov & Yokomoto?

• Do you mean the 1972 or 1982 paper?

15. What are the relevant selection effects?

• Objects should be observable.
• That our sample is incomplete.

16. Did you include the ponderomotive force?

• No, why bother?
• It is beyond the scope of this research.

17. Did you take relativistic effects into account?

• No, but Einstein did.

18. What are your future plans?

• Mind your own business, don't get personal.
• You mean the one with Naomi Campbell or the one with your wife?
• I'll tell you next year.

19. Can I see the third viewgraph again?

• Your place or mine?

20. Where is the Crab in this picture?

• Did you say crap?? . (throw something)

21. Is that a background source?

• Did you never see a picture of the Moon?
• No, that's the object of interest.
• No, it's a coffee stain.
• Depends on the distance.

22. How does this apply to the star formation?

• We don't know how the stars form, do we?
• We can't rule out that stars indeed do form.

23. Is this an evolutionary effect?

• Not in this steady state model.

24. What do you want to explain with this research?

• 42.
• That you're wrong.

25. Is there anything new in this?

• Let me show you the third sheet again.
• I bought a new tie for this talk.

26. What is the physics behind this?

• Didn't you read Chebnyakov & Yokomoto?

27. Are the observations consistent with the theory?

• We need more data.
• That's beyond the scope of this research.

28. Did you subtract the continuum?

• Huhhh, . No, . but ehhh, we added some.

29. How does the source look like in other wavelengths?

• Different.

30. What is your spatial resolution?

• Less that 4 Sr.
• Depends on H0.

31. Did you correct for extinction?

• What's your point?
• Of course not, that's difficult.

32. How do you treat your boundaries?

• The solution is periodic, you fool.
• Since they are often at the edge of the simulation volume, they are unimportant.

33. Are the results consistent with the observations?

• We need more free parameters.

34. Is the result unique?

• Yes, we are inconsistent with all previous studies.

35. What did you take for the initial conditions?

• 42.
• A pioneer fellowship.

36. Is your solution stable?

• As long as you do not perturb it.

37. Is this a SEDFG code?

• RTFM!!!

38. Are you planning to extend your code to 3D?

• And DROP one dimension?

39. Are the results self-consistent?

• We need more data.
• Ask Popper.
• I'll come to that back later.
• I only started this research last year.

40. How did you define your normalizations?

• Every constant of nature was set to 42.

41. What is the effect of non-linearity?

It is a second order effect.

Standard answers

Here we give the list of answers to questions which you don't understand, or which are not relevant to your subject at all.

• Yes . eh . No.
• We need more data.
• I'll come back to that later.
• Mind your own business.
• Read my annual review.
• Your guess is as good as mine.
• I think you might have a point.
• I do not want to make a strong statement out of that.
• The error-bars are denoted at the bottom left part of the diagram.
• In about half the dynamic time scale.
• That's beyond the scope of this research.
• I'm working on that now.
• 42.
• I've only started my Ph.D. project half a year ago.
• We'll discuss that after the talk (while you think: "I have to catch the bus").
• Maybe "le directeur" knows.
• It's a second order effect.
• Within a factor 2.
• You got me there.
• Only God or Einstein knows.
• That is work my collaborator did.