Journal publications that go through peer review are the bread and butter of modern science. As an aspiring physicists, I started the process a few months ago. It has been longer than I thought it would be. I finally (finally!!!) got the reviews from the referees. One, really liked it, but considers it more appropiate for a sister publication of the journal. That referee also didn't quite get some fundamental concepts. In a nutshell, he liked the paper a lot, but wants me to expand it, making it more suitable for the sister journal that has no lenght constraints. The second referee didn't like some things, and in fact, confused my example for my general procedure. I am not discouraged, the editor suggested the sister publication (that is a very good one too), and I can see how I can incorporate some of the criticisms into making it more clear. But, the most infuriating thing is that it is obvious that the referees didn't read the references, or they would have found answers to their questions. So it goes.
On the other hand, papers with very funny titles get published. I wish I was that clever.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment