I like this:

To illustrate the standard candle property of gamma-ray pulsars (and also to thereby confirm the recent first-principle calculation of pulsar gamma-ray emission), we “measure”, via the lightcurve fitting, three distances and one moment of inertia of some weak pulsars. We are not sure what the three distances are good for, but the measurement of the moment of inertia must be of interest for nuclear physics. Although we must state that the quality of the numerical program which we use to calculate the lightcurves and efficiencies is inadequate (as are the author’s qualifications as a numericist and data analyst), in good hands, and upon an easily doable extension to non-weak pulsars, the method’s yield should be impressive.

Following up on my last post, here’s another example of beautifully clear writing:

The interferometers now being developed to detect gravitational vaves work by measuring small changes in the positions of free masses. There has been a controversy whether quantum-mechanical radiation-pressure fluctuations disturb this measurement. This Letter resolves the controversy: They do.

This was brought to my attention in the PSU colloquium this week by Dan Stamper-Kurn.

Can apparent superluminal neutrino speeds be explained as a quantum weak measurement?

Probably not.

I know “best” is meant as a joke, but seriously, we need more writing like this. The title poses the question and the abstract answers it, short and to-the-point and completely comprehensible.

Courtesy of the Improbable Research blog.