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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #391626

Re: Request for Peer Review

Show all headers | View raw

Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 8/27/2016 2:15 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> On 8/25/2016 12:08 PM, Alan Folmsbee wrote:
>>>> My 12 page paper on gravity is ready to be submitted to a journal. I
>>>> would like the paper to have peer reviews done before the final version
>>>> is sent off. If you have a master of science degree you are a peer.
>>>
>>> Several comments.
>>>
>>> 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?
>>
>> Because they are not qualified to judge.  The subject of the paper is
>> well outside of their field.  (That was an easy one.)
> 
> If his peers (masters in electrical engineering) are not qualified to
> judge the paper, then how is he (a master in electrical engineering)
> qualified to write the paper?

There is a chance that he is not, but that is beside the point.  “Peer 
review” does _not_ mean review from one’s closest peers, for example not 
only by peers from within the field one has a degree in. 

>>> It is not something that is solicited by the author, it
>>> is something solicited by the editorial staff of the journal.
>>
>> Nonsense.  And 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.

> The author submits a paper to a peer-reviewed journal.
> *Post-submission*, the editorial staff sends the paper to peers that
> they commission to review the paper. The author has no role in that
> selection.

AISB, you have a very narrow understanding of the term “peer review”.

>>> Do you have an idea of what journal you plan to submit to? You will have
>>> to format according to their submission guidelines, depending on the
>>> choice.
>> A scientific paper does not have to be submitted to a scientific journal
>> per se.  Some are only submitted to conferences, some are never formally
>> submitted.
> 
> But in the present context (see quoted from OP), he intends to submit to
> a scientific journal.

And he is asking the subscribers of a newsgroup that was created to discuss 
matters in the pertaining field to review his work before he does, which is 
a legitimate request (no matter what the degree of nonsense in work might 
be, and likely is in this case).  A scientific newsgroup can serve as an 
informal commission for peer review as their are undoubtedly scientists 
working in the pertaining field subscribed to it.

Before scientific journals existed, and even when they already existed, 
scientists would send their work to their peers who were working in the same 
field and in related fields, they would correspond in letters with them, to 
have their work and ideas checked and commented on.  Since we are in 
sci.physics.relativity, take Einstein’s well-documented correspondences as 
an example.

I suggest you learn about the origins and types of “peer review” to gain a 
better understanding of the subject.

-- 
PointedEars

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

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous 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