Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #391969

Re: Request for Peer Review

From Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: Request for Peer Review
Date 2016-09-10 17:10 +0200
Organization PointedEars Software (PES)
Message-ID <1998649.ElGaqSPkdT@PointedEars.de> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <nqmgsn$187r$1@gioia.aioe.org> <10684615.O9o76ZdvQC@PointedEars.de> <nqnfds$umv$1@gioia.aioe.org> <3927690.LvFx2qVVIh@PointedEars.de> <nqpsub$i1c$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw


Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 9/7/2016 2:57 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> On 9/6/2016 12:04 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> […] you are contradicting yourself.
>>>>> How so?
>>>> First you suggested to him that he should submit it “to his peers”
>>>> (applying your very narrow understanding of “peer review”), then you
>>>> are claiming that “peer review” is not to be solicited by the author
>>>> (him). Those approaches are contradictory; make up your mind.
>>>
>>> I in no way suggested that he should submit it to his peers.
>>
>> | You have a masters in electrical engineering. If you would like your
>> | paper reviewed by peers, why are you not submitting it to a group of
>> | electrical engineers with masters degrees?
>>
>>   —“Odd Bodkin” in <news:npnelf$ngb$1@gioia.aioe.org>
> 
> Yes, not that it is a QUESTION, not a suggestion.

The suggestion is implied in the question, and you know it.

> I am asking why, if it is his declared intent to ask for a review for
> peers, he is in fact not doing that.

You could have skipped that question, because the question presupposes the 
correctness of your misconception that a peer review of a paper must be done 
by the peers in the same field of study that one is primarily working in or 
educated in, instead of in the field of study that concerns itself with the 
topic of the paper.

For example, when an someone who has an education as electrical engineer 
wants to publish a paper on gravitation, the peer review has to be done by 
physicists, preferably those who are experts in theories of gravitation, and 
not by electrical engineers.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Request for Peer Review Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-08-25 10:08 -0700
  Re: Request for Peer Review Python <python@org.invalid> - 2016-08-25 19:20 +0200
    Re: Request for Peer Review Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 09:31 -0700
  Re: Request for Peer Review "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-08-25 10:29 -0700
    Re: Request for Peer Review Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-08-27 07:34 -0700
      Re: Request for Peer Review astrofoton@interia.pl - 2016-08-27 09:23 -0700
  Re: Request for Peer Review Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-25 13:50 -0500
    Re: Request for Peer Review Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-08-25 15:26 -0700
    Re: Request for Peer Review Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-27 09:15 +0200
      Re: Request for Peer Review Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-06 08:38 -0500
        Re: Request for Peer Review Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-09-06 09:03 -0700
          Re: Request for Peer Review "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-06 09:15 -0700
            Re: Request for Peer Review "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-06 10:46 -0700
          Re: Request for Peer Review Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-06 17:08 -0500
            Re: Request for Peer Review benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-06 19:23 -0400
        Re: Request for Peer Review Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-06 19:04 +0200
          Re: Request for Peer Review Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-06 17:20 -0500
            Re: Request for Peer Review benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-06 19:38 -0400
              Re: Request for Peer Review Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-07 07:29 -0500
            Re: Request for Peer Review Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-07 21:57 +0200
              Re: Request for Peer Review Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-07 15:22 -0500
                Re: Request for Peer Review Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-07 15:26 -0500
                Re: Request for Peer Review Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-10 17:10 +0200
                Re: Request for Peer Review Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 17:57 -0500
                Re: Request for Peer Review Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-12 04:02 +0200
                Re: Request for Peer Review Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 21:50 -0500
                Re: Request for Peer Review "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-12 06:09 -0700
  Re: Request for Peer Review pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2016-08-27 19:53 -0700
  Re: Request for Peer Review RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-27 21:10 -0700
    Re: Request for Peer Review Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 09:20 -0700

csiph-web