"That was not my title, which was: 'Isotopic Spin and Curious Particles.' Physical Review rejected 'Curious Particles'. Murray Gell-Mann's work on classifying the elementary particles, 1953 The paper, "The role of citric acid in intermediate metabolism in animal tissues," went on to be published in the Dutch journal Enzymologia later that year, and in 1953 Krebs won the Nobel Prize in Medicine for "his discovery of the citric acid cycle".ģ.
"This was the first time in my career, after having published more than 50 papers, that I had rejection or semi-rejection," Krebs wrote in his memoir. There wasn't anything wrong with Krebs' paper, but Nature had such a backlog of submissions at the time that they simply couldn't look at it. Yes, even scientists who have textbook processes named after them have faced rejection. Hans Krebs' paper on the citric acid cycle, AKA the Krebs cycle, 1937 The paper went on to be the foundation of the work that won Fermi the 1938 Nobel Prize in Physics, at the age of 37, for "demonstrations of the existence of new radioactive elements produced by neutron irradiation, and for his related discovery of nuclear reactions brought about by slow neutrons".Ģ. Weak interaction, one of the four (or potentially five) fundamental forces of nature, was first described by Enrico Fermi back in 1933, in his paper "An attempt of a theory of beta radiation," published in German journal Zeitschrift für Physik.īut it was first rejected from Nature for being 'too removed from reality'.
"It contained speculations too remote from reality to be of interest to the reader." - Frank Close, Small Things and Nothing Enrico Fermi's seminal paper on weak interaction, 1933 Hearing about the renowned pieces of work that faced setbacks before going on to revolutionise the field is a comforting reminder that rejection isn't necessarily the end of your research - sometimes it's just the beginning.ġ. They will often suggest revisions to be made, and can reject a paper if they think more work needs to be done, or if it's not the right fit for the journal.įollowing rejection, the end product is usually better than it would have been originally - or it at least, ends up in a more approporiate journal. Peer-review involves having a group of independent researchers read every paper submitted to a journal to make sure that the methods and conclusions are solid. That's not to say the publication system failed these researchers - in fact, the rejection process is part of good, healthy peer-review.
#GOOD PHYSICS SCIENCE JOURNALS SERIES#
This thematic series is dedicated to all aspects of space-based quantum technologies from fundamental physics to quantum communication protocols including proposals for new space-based quantum experiments as well as terrestrial experimental tests of new quantum technologies for space deployment.But it turns out that plenty of world-famous researchers went through rejection before finally having their papers published - including a few papers that later went on to win a Nobel Prize. Rainer Kaltenbaek, Vienna Center for Quantum Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics, University of Vienna Space Applications of Quantum Technologyĭr. We are welcoming submissions to a special issue on Quantum Magnetometers, devices that utilize a quantum system, coherence and/or entanglement to measure magnetic fields with advanced properties compared to classical devices.įind out more here. Svenja Knappe, University of Colorado Boulder This Thematic Series will be devoted to recent developments in plasma diagnostics with particular focus on emerging unconventional diagnostics.įind out more here. We are welcoming submissions to the following article collections!ĭr Thomas Trottenberg, Institut für Experimentelle und Angewandte Physik, AG PlasmaPhysik / PlasmaTechnologie, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Germany
0 kommentar(er)
