求真分享 http://blog.sciencenet.cn/u/zlyang 求真务实

博文

[争鸣] 激光器与引力波“被”拒稿:功不抵过?

已有 1309 次阅读 2019-12-28 17:54 |系统分类:科研笔记| 激光, 引力波, 拒稿, 功过, Lasers, Lasers, Lasers, Lasers, Lasers

为我国2070年开始的诺贝尔科学奖“井喷”清除障碍、铺平道路!

          

[争鸣] 激光器引力波“被”拒稿:功不抵过?

            

一、激光

    我国专家认为:
    激光、原子能、半导体及计算机,是二十世纪四项重大发明。
    美国国家科学院 NAS 评出的“20项20世纪最伟大的工程成就”里,“激光和光纤”列为第18项(18. Laser and Fiber Optics)。
    与激光有关的研究,获得诺贝尔奖至少5次了。

                     
二、引力波

    相对论引力波是1936年爱因斯坦等人提出的。1893年奥利弗·海维赛德(Oliver Heaviside)就提出了非相对论引力波 gravitational waves。
    奥利弗·海维赛德,比爱因斯坦早了43年。
    The Nobel Prize in Physics 2017 发给了 LIGO 的引力波探测。假定LIGO真的检测到了引力波,那这个引力波到底是海维赛德的,还是爱因斯坦的?

              
三、“红宝石激光器”1960年被《Physical Review》拒稿

     可怜的《物理评论 Physical Review》 Samuel Goudsmit 主编上了审稿人的大当,1960年拒发美国休斯公司梅曼(Theodore Harold Maiman)的红宝石激光一文。
          

四、爱因斯坦1936年引力波被《Physical Review》拒稿

    《物理评论 Physical Review》可以大大地做广告了:1936年拒发了爱因斯坦有问题的引力波稿件。
    爱因斯坦是一位善良的正直的科学家,一生至少犯了23个科技错误。像引力波这样的小错,爱因斯坦自己会纠正的,用不着审稿人大惊小怪。

               
五、激光与引力波:《Physical Review》功不抵过?

    《Physical Review》拒稿了“激光器”和“引力波”。目前看来是一对一错。
    《Physical Review》在这两件事情上,总体评价“功不抵过”(功 < 过,或者“功绩小过失大”)?
    核心:
    “同行评议”往往是阻碍“重大创新”的。
    正如我国一位真正的大专家所说:
    “一切真理开始时总是在少数人手里,总是受到大多数人的压力。这是一个规律。
    

参考资料:

[1] the 20th century's greatest engineering achievements, the National Academy of Engineering
http://www.greatachievements.org/
18. Laser and Fiber Optics
http://www.greatachievements.org/?id=2966
Lasers and Fiber Optics Timeline
http://www.greatachievements.org/?id=3706
    1960 Operable laser invented
    Theodore Maiman, a physicist and electrical engineer at Hughes Research Laboratories, invents an operable laser using a synthetic pink ruby crystal as the medium. Encased in a "flash tube" and book ended by mirrors, the laser successfully produces a pulse of light. Prior to Maiman’s working model, Columbia University doctoral student Gordon Gould also designs a laser, but his patent application is initially denied. Gould finally wins patent recognition nearly 30 years later.

[2] The Nobel Prize in Physics 1964
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1964/summary/
    Charles Hard Townes   Prize share: 1/2
    Nicolay Gennadiyevich Basov   Prize share: 1/4
    Aleksandr Mikhailovich Prokhorov   Prize share: 1/4
    The Nobel Prize in Physics 1964 was divided, one half awarded to Charles Hard Townes, the other half jointly to Nicolay Gennadiyevich Basov and Aleksandr Mikhailovich Prokhorov "for fundamental work in the field of quantum electronics, which has led to the construction of oscillators and amplifiers based on the maser-laser principle."

[3] A History of the Laser: 1960 - 2019
https://www.photonics.com/articles/a_history_of_the_laser_1960_-_2019/a42279

[4] Generalized Lorenz-Mie theories and mechanical effects of laser light, on the occasion of Arthur Ashkin's receipt of the 2018 Nobel prize in physics for his pioneering work in optical levitation and manipulation: A review [J}. Gouesbet, Gérard (CORIA-UMR 6614- Normandie Université CNRS-Université et INSA de Rouen Campus Universitaire du Madrillet, Saint-Etienne-du Rouvray, 76800, France) Source: Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer, v 225, p 258-277, March 2019
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002240731830788X?via%3Dihub
[5] SCIENCE, 1964, Research on Maser-Laser Principle Wins Nobel Prize in Physics
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/146/3646/897
[6] Antigone Marino, 2019, Physics, lasers and the nobel prize
https://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/abs/2019/02/epn2019502p26/epn2019502p26.html

[7] Oliver Heaviside. A Gravitational and Electromagnetic Analogy Part I. The Electrician, 1893, 31: 281-282.
[8] Oliver Heaviside. A Gravitational and Electromagnetic Analogy Part II. The Electrician, 1893, 31: 359.
http://sergf.ru/Heavisid.htm
[9] The Nobel Prize in Physics 2017

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2017/summary/

    The Nobel Prize in Physics 2017 was divided, one half awarded to Rainer Weiss, the other half jointly to Barry C. Barish and Kip S. Thorne "for decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves." 

[10] The Nobel Prize in Physics 2018

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2018/summary/

    The Nobel Prize in Physics 2018 was awarded "for groundbreaking inventions in the field of laser physics" with one half to Arthur Ashkin "for the optical tweezers and their application to biological systems", the other half jointly to Gérard Mourou and Donna Strickland "for their method of generating high-intensity, ultra-short optical pulses."

[11] 刘寄星. 《爱因斯坦和同行审稿制度的一次冲突》[J]. 物理, 2005, 34(07): 487-490.
http://www.wuli.ac.cn/CN/abstract/abstract30656.shtml
    《物理评论》当然也发表过错误文章,也犯过由于审稿人知识所限对重要文章拒稿的错误,最有名的事例是20 世纪60 年代初,当时的主编 Goudsmit 拒绝 Maiman 关于激光的文章。
[12] 科学网,2008-11-13,《探索》杂志:爱因斯坦一生中的23个错误
http://news.sciencenet.cn/htmlnews/2008/11/213197.html

相关链接:
[1] 2019-12-18,Zenas 公理:2017年《Nature》主编的表述
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-107667-1210560.html
[2] 2019-12-27,阻碍人类文明进步的评审人,任其“逍遥法外”:真是对真理莫大的讽刺!
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-107667-1211732.html
[3] 2019-12-02,[随笔] 科技“同行评议”引发美国《大停滞》?
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-107667-1208480.html
[4] 2015-09-04,1900年以来,被拒绝发表的重大科技成果实例(搜集)
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-107667-918419.html
[5] 2019-12-21,爱因斯坦“奇迹年”的直接原因:没有“同行评议”
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-107667-1210941.html
[6] 同行评议的局限性和改进之策[J],《科技中国》,2019年第十一期pp.34-36,日期:2019-11-19
http://www.casted.org.cn/channel/newsinfo/7562
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-107667-1206879.html
[7] 对科技成果代表作评价的具体建议[J],《科技中国》,2019年第二期p41,日期:2019-02-25
http://www.casted.org.cn/channel/newsinfo/7120
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-107667-1164530.html

                          

感谢您的指教!

感谢您指正以上任何错误!

感谢您提供更多的相关资料!



http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-107667-1211851.html

上一篇:阻碍人类文明进步的评审人,任其“逍遥法外”:真是对真理莫大的讽刺!
下一篇:[建议] 强制中国资助科技项目的主要成果首先用中文发表在《科学通报》!

8 郑永军 王从彦 檀成龙 宁利中 苏保霞 刘良桂 张忆文 伍赛特

该博文允许注册用户评论 请点击登录 评论 (2 个评论)

数据加载中...
扫一扫,分享此博文

Archiver|手机版|科学网 ( 京ICP备07017567号-12 )

GMT+8, 2020-10-29 05:16

Powered by ScienceNet.cn

Copyright © 2007- 中国科学报社

返回顶部