High School Is this real verified science?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hagar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Science
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the verification of scientific claims, specifically regarding the article "Ultrafast Light Switching of Ferromagnetism in EuSe" by A. B. Henriques et al., published in Physical Review Letters (2018). The consensus is that the publication in a reputable journal like Phys. Rev. Lett., one of the top three journals in physics, lends credibility to the findings. However, verification of scientific results requires replication and further experimentation, making publication only the initial step in a lengthy validation process.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of peer-reviewed journals and their significance in scientific research
  • Familiarity with the concept of scientific verification and replication
  • Knowledge of the publication process in physics, particularly in high-impact journals
  • Access to scientific databases such as ArXiv for preprints
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the publication standards of top physics journals like Nature and Science
  • Learn about the process of scientific replication and its importance in experimental physics
  • Explore the significance of ArXiv in disseminating scientific research prior to peer review
  • Investigate methods for evaluating the credibility of scientific claims and sources
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, physicists, and students interested in understanding the rigor of scientific publication and the processes involved in verifying experimental results.

Physics news on Phys.org
Looks fine at first glance. Why do you ask?
 
Given that it cites to a reputatable peer reviewed journal article, probably yes.

A. B. Henriques et al, Ultrafast Light Switching of Ferromagnetism in EuSe, Physical Review Letters (2018). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.217203
 
Last edited:
hagar said:
I wasn't sure about the source I received it from.

There are 3 things you need to do when you read something like this and want to make a first pass as evaluating it:

1. Check the publication source. This one was citing a publication in Phys. Rev. Lett. (they give you a link).

2. Then, go to our list of acceptable journals and see if Phys. Rev. Lett. is one of the journals. This will tell you whether this is a respectable journal, or some fly-by-night-and-accepts-anything-under-the-sun journal. In physics, Phys. Rev. Lett. is one of the top 3 most-prestigious journals for physics papers (the other 2 being Nature and Science).

3. And this is a separate issue. The question on whether it is "verified science" is completely different than figuring out if it has been properly published. Verification of anything in physics often requires time. For an experimental result, it requires that other people reproduce the same experiment, and even go beyond that (such as increasing the accuracy and sensitivity of the experiment). Publishing it first in a reputable journal is the first step in an often tedious process of verification.

If you do not have access to the PRL paper itself, check out the ArXiv upload:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.05038

Zz.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Drakkith, ohwilleke, berkeman and 1 other person
ZapperZ said:
There are 3 things you need to do when you read something like this and want to make a first pass as evaluating it:

1. Check the publication source. This one was citing a publication in Phys. Rev. Lett. (they give you a link).

2. Then, go to our list of acceptable journals and see if Phys. Rev. Lett. is one of the journals. This will tell you whether this is a respectable journal, or some fly-by-night-and-accepts-anything-under-the-sun journal. In physics, Phys. Rev. Lett. is one of the top 3 most-prestigious journals for physics papers (the other 2 being Nature and Science).

3. And this is a separate issue. The question on whether it is "verified science" is completely different than figuring out if it has been properly published. Verification of anything in physics often requires time. For an experimental result, it requires that other people reproduce the same experiment, and even go beyond that (such as increasing the accuracy and sensitivity of the experiment). Publishing it first in a reputable journal is the first step in an often tedious process of verification.

If you do not have access to the PRL paper itself, check out the ArXiv upload:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.05038

Zz.
Thank you for the info.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
740
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K