博文

Thank you for your submission to Carbon. Our Editorial Team screens all new manuscripts for importance, novelty, fit to the journal, presentation quality, and the expected level of interest among our readership in the international carbon materials community. Based on this screening, only a fraction of submissions is sent out for the full peer review process. Unfortunately, we have decided not to continue the reviewing process at this time.

I would also like to emphasize that Carbon receives about 6,000 manuscripts per year and rejects about 80% of the submitted manuscripts. If the manuscript falls short, like in this case, we respectfully ask the authors to submit elsewhere. I would like to emphasize that by taking such a decision, I want to save time on your side since the reviewing process is very strict and extremely tough, and only extremely original papers are accepted with minor revisions.

Please also consider that an appeal of this decision might result in a lengthy and time-consuming editorial process, which in most cases does not revert the editorial decision. The journal will not operate if we consider all appeals for revisions. We thank you for letting us consider your work, and we hope you will submit the best of your future manuscripts to Carbon.

编辑的逻辑：

错误文章比纠错文章更有发表的价值。

原来要求将评述文章写成“review”仅仅是不许评论的托词。

===============

Comments on: “A perspective on impedance matching and resonance absorption

mechanism for electromagnetic wave absorbing” by Hou et al. [Carbon 222 (2024) 118935]

Article (Preprint v1) by Yue Liu et al. | Qeios

2024年05月09日 07:08 (星期四)

Ms. Ref. No.: CARBON-D-24-01526

Title: Comments on: “A perspective on impedance matching and resonance absorption mechanism for electromagnetic wave absorbing” by Hou et al. [Carbon 222 (2024) 118935]

Carbon

Dear Dr. Liu,

There is a series of papers listed that seem to advocate similar ‘corrections’ in other journals outlined in their letter to the editors. Here the attention seems to be on a single paper by Hou et al. As stated in the abstract 'This is a comment on the problems of the paper by Hou et al., which are related to wrong theories dominated in current research of microwave absorption’. This paper is referenced as [46] (one might logically assume it should be [1]). This seems to be a general research paper focussed on the general theory. It currently does not conform to the format of a letter. It would be advisable to write a ‘review’ or ‘research’ paper in the general context as the link to Hou et al.’s paper seems simply a link to advocate the position in the other papers listed in the cover letter. One also wonders whether the authors have communicated with Hou if the ‘correction’ is solely related to their paper or the wider collection of papers within the journal.

要求将评述文章写成“review”。实际仅仅是托词而已。

===========================

期刊撤稿，实际上是期刊没有办法的办法，

只要还有一点办法，期刊是不愿意将自己刊物的文章撤稿的。

------------

学术期刊不是教材，不是科普刊物，

学术期刊面向的不是不懂科学的普通大众，

学术期刊面向的是有鉴别能力的科学家，

科学自身有清洁功能，科学不怕误导，

学术期刊存在的真正意义在于传播新思想，而不特别在意这种新思想是不是正确。

2 两篇评论文章

https://doi.org/10.32388/9P8Q56