View Single Post
Astronuc
#5
May5-06, 07:21 AM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,885
Quote Quote by ZapperZ
I just wish New Scientist pays attention to this report itself, since it has the tendency to report on outlandish ideas that often have not been given any reasonable validity.
I put New Scientist in the same category with OMNI magazine. Scientific American is so much better. I agree that NS publishes peoples' outlandish ideas, and do not put a lot of stock in their publications. I certainly would not publish with them.

Quote Quote by ZapperZ
People tend to forget that publications in science journals is only the FIRST STEP in disseminating ideas and discoveries for others to study, disect, and verify. You need to get published first before this process can start. Publication does not automatically means validity. If it does, the BCS theory does not have to wait for 15 years for their authors to win the Nobel Prize. Even the dubious Fleishman and Pons cold fusion paper was published, and it was only after that can we clealy verify that what they reported didn't happen!
I agree.

Quote Quote by ZapperZ
I do not know what is the rate of falsified work there are in physics journals. I would hazzard a guess that it is smaller in the most prestigous journals such as Nature, Science, and PRL.
I would hope that the rate of falsified work is very low, less than a few percent, and actually I would rather people did not falsify work - it will be discovered sooner or later, especially if someone tries to repeat the work, apply it, or test it.

I think there maybe a greater degree of misinterpretation, or faulty extrapolation. At least, that has been my experience. And I have seen highly detailed technical reports that contained faulty data and conclusions, e.g. from simple mistakes like a faulty calibration in the initial phase of the work, which was not discovered until after the final report was issued!

It is the lower-tier journals that have weaker requirements and refereeing that may be the culprit. But hey, the quacks need some source to bolster their theory.
Yeah, and I wish they would stop doing that!