[ANN] JuliaPhysics organization & logo contest

Community
1

I’ve just registered a new Julia organization at JuliaPhysics · GitHub with the goal of gathering generic packages that can be useful in physics. For example, I’m considering the possibility of moving Measurements.jl there. If you have a package that you think fits in this organization, do not hesitate to tell me here.

While we are at it, I’d like to ask to all the great logo designers here (so I’m excluded from this call for action :smile:) to propose a logo for the organization. I thought about a simple atomic model like this in place of the Julia circles:

512×512 62.9 KB

But if you have better ideas, please do share them. Thanks!

14 Likes
2

I think what you have is nice, with the colors of each of the three orbitals in the Julia colors as well (you could still retain the lightness gradient).

3 Likes
3

Physics is not exactly a narrow and well-defined field, what kind of packages do you envision will be incorporated? The qualifier “generic” is suggestive, but could you expand on this?

6 Likes
4

I just wanted to mirror JuliaMath. I think that both Mathematics and Physics are quite broad fields, so if you have concerns about JuliaPhysics you should have the same about JuliaMath :wink: In JuliaMath there are packages for numerical integration, polynomials, special functions, FFT, interpolation, etc. They are “generic” packages in the sense that don’t constitute a very specific application, but instead can be likely used by other packages.

Measurements.jl is a package for uncertainty propagation, it may be used in other specific applications. In this way I think it fits well in this organization. Maybe also packages like Unitful.jl and SIUnits.jl are good candidates for the organization.

Is it clearer now? :slight_smile:

2 Likes
5

I have no concerns at all - just interested in what your plans are.

2 Likes
6

A google search suggests that no one can think of anything more physics-ish than the atom orbit. Me, I’d plump for a spherical cow :cow:; luckily I’m away from my computer on my iPhone for a week so I’m spared the task of trying to draw one… :slight_smile:

7 Likes
7

To start the ball rolling, here are a few ideas. There’s a lot of stuff in physics to choose from!

1: Rutherford

2: Newton

3: LIGO

4: Cow

(I shouldn’t have mentioned this one, I realise that now… :))

21 Likes
8

Wow, they’re all amazing! The caption for the fourth logo could be “Physics made easy with Julia” :smiley: (that apparently closes match JuliaMath’s description)

2 Likes
9

I have a slight preference for the second one, Newton, but maybe with the colors sorted by frequency (red, green, purple) ;-). But really, they’re all very nice, the first one is much better than what I thought!

3 Likes
10

The galaxy one is really nice!

2 Likes
11

Artistically the proposed logos are certainly nice, but from a physics viewpoint particularly the Rutherford model is kind of outdated (a great achievement at that time). How about a (higher order) Feynman diagram, as a stimulus for people who can make pretty logos:

\                 /
 \               /
  \             /
   |---Julia---|
   |           |
   |--Physics--|
  /             \
 /               \
/                 \
2 Likes
12

Yes, of course it’s outdated, but the Rutherford model is probably much better known by non-specialists than Feynman diagrams :slight_smile: But you’re right that perhaps a Feynman diagram would match better the feeling of Julia being “modern”! Maybe a penguin diagram like this

?

2 Likes
13

The Feynman diagram is a good idea. Iconic designs usually linger in the public mind longer than they should: here in the U.K. the road sign warning of a railway crossing still shows a steam train…:grinning:

1 Like
14

OK, the cow absoluely needs to be the logo for some organisation, if not this one.

8 Likes
15

Big +1 for the Rutherford one (but all are very nice)

2 Likes
16

Something quick while procrastinating (not pixelperfect or anything, just quickly thrown together in inkscape):

18 Likes
17

This one’s really nice.

Please, just not the Rutherford/Bohr one. It would be unfortunate to further it as a universal symbol for physics, it’s a really bad one.

2 Likes
18

Being well familiar and clearly conveying a message is the most important features of a logo. Image google “physics logo”…The Feynman might as well be some random networking thing for someone without quantum mechanics knowledge.

4 Likes
19

I would hope that one positive side-effect of “Big Bang Theory” would be that people would recognize Feynman diagrams now. By your argument, no logo other than the Rutherford one would work… that just makes me sad.

1 Like
20

Fair enough. The Rutherford one is a bit to antiquated imho, but what might work is the spectroscopy/prism idea or maybe something that shows the E- or B-field of the three (charged) circles/spheres. Those concepts should be familiar enough to non-physicists, I think?

1 Like