退稿后，爱因斯坦发誓不再在"物理评论"发表论文。

Einstein vs. Physical Review

by Sean

Despite the fact that the arxiv has made it possible to disseminate papers well before they are sent to a journal, the process of anonymous peer review is still crucial to physics and the rest of science. Anyone who has at least a couple of published papers has appeared on the radar screen of various journals as a potential referee, and pretty soon the requests to review papers come fast and furious. And it’s not a matter of rubber-stamping; I’ve personally refereed about 100 papers, and recommended less than half of them for publication. Of course, individual referees can behave quite differently; editors like referees who will actually read the paper, are willing to reject it if it’s bad, and get the reviews back quickly. I used to be good at all three of those, although my record on the last point has deteriorated seriously of late.

Every paper sent to a journal like Physical Review (in all of its contemporary manifestations) is sent to a referee as a matter of course. It wasn’t always thus. The current issue of Physics Today has a great article about Albert Einstein’s run-in with the journal in 1936.

In his salad days, Einstein published in German journals such as Annalen der Physik, but he eventually switched to American journals after he moved to the U.S. He had published a couple of papers in the Physical Review, which were apparently accepted by editor John Tate without being sent to a referee. These included the famous Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen paper on nonlocality in quantum mechanics, “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?”

But in 1936 Einstein and Rosen submitted a paper on the existence of gravitational waves that struck Tate as suspicious, and he decided to send it to the referee. The Physics Today article reveals that the referee was relativist Howard Percy Robertson. Soon after the initial formulation of general relativity, Einstein predicted the existence of gravitational waves by doing the obvious thing — examining the behavior of small fluctuations in the gravitational field using perturbation theory. But Einstein and Rosen had attempted to solve the full equations without any approximations, and were able to prove that there were no non-singular solutions; they therefore claimed that gravitational waves didn’t exist! Robertson figured out that they had made a classic error in GR — essentially, they had used a bad coordinate system. He wrote a ten-page report explaining why the conclusions of the paper were incorrect.

Einstein explained that he had submitted his paper for publication, not for refereeing.

Dear Sir,

所有跟帖： 

• continued：退稿后，爱因斯坦发誓不再在"物理评论"发表论文。 -xilihudu0- ♀ (1332 bytes) () 09/13/2010 postreply 16:08:39

• continued：退稿后，爱因斯坦发誓不再在"物理评论"发表论文。 -xilihudu0- ♀ (1240 bytes) () 09/13/2010 postreply 16:12:18

• link -xilihudu0- ♀ (88 bytes) () 09/13/2010 postreply 16:14:51

• 爱因斯坦和同行审稿制度的一次冲突 by 刘寄星 -xilihudu0- ♀ (72 bytes) () 09/20/2010 postreply 00:34:40

• 正应那句话：有眼不识泰山。 -9753- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/05/2010 postreply 20:03:49