Mason Mathematical Sciences Laboratory.
Second floor.
In the large workshop next to the central laboratory, a group of people gathered at Bill Carr's desk, staring closely at the mathematical work he had completed on the manuscript paper.
The black ink pen writes lines of clear characters, which makes people feel immersed in it. Through the connotation displayed by the characters, it seems that they can see the huge changes in the future technological era.
Everyone concentrated, everyone held their breath, and everyone suppressed their excitement.
There were two streaks of black and blue hanging from the corner of Birkar's eyes. He obviously didn't get enough rest, but he seemed very energetic. He was also very excited and suppressed his excitement to finish the last part of the content.
Comparative judgment.
Detailed calculations.
Substitute numbers, transform, then determine and transform equations.
When he finished writing the last symbol, Bill Carr immediately clenched his fists without even checking it, and everyone else cheered excitedly, "Yeah~~"
"It's done! It's finally done!"
"Kacher, your method of inversely transforming equations using geometry is wonderful!"
"Your graphics splicing logic is also excellent!"
“This is the best research ever!”
"We're done!"
Everyone is very excited, everyone is very excited.
Wang Hao and Birkar hugged each other, and Lin Bohan, Luo Dayong, He Yi, Yan Jing, Zhang Zhiqiang and others who were watching also came over to hug them.
This moment is indeed exciting.
Everyone knows how significant the research done is.
If history has records, they relied on theoretical research at this moment to officially open the "superconducting era" of human science and technology.
After getting excited, Wang Hao asked Zhang Zhiqiang to help organize the internal celebration, and then talked about the thesis issue, "We can start preparing the thesis. We will have a day off today and start writing the thesis tomorrow."
"Our main papers must be completed together, and your respective papers must also be prepared. It is best to publish them together. I will contact academic journals in advance."
"Everyone go back to rest first, recuperate your spirits, and then go out for dinner together in the evening."
"Let's talk about the thesis after we have a good rest!"
During this period, everyone is very busy. They devote themselves to their work. It is very good to sleep for six hours a day.
You can tell just by looking at Birkar's mental state. Everyone else is similar. Even Wang Hao is doing research except sleeping.
Now I can finally breathe a sigh of relief.
Wang Hao returned to his office. He did not take a break immediately. Instead, he wrote an email to Baker Campbell, the head of the physics department of Nature magazine, to make an appointment in advance to publish the content.
The content of the email is as follows--
"My team has made new progress in the follow-up research on the superconducting mechanism. It will probably be submitted next week. Can I publish it in the next issue of the newsletter?"
Wang Hao did not consider the issue of review. He had already submitted two manuscripts before, and published the contents of "Superconducting Laws" and "Yang-Mills Equation Prediction of Particle Collision Experiments".
He is the leader in new fields and the most authoritative figure in the world.
Publishing subsequent research results in the same field naturally does not require review.
In addition, the review process will be very complicated.
If they want to find professionals to review the content of their research, they must verify the conclusions. Even the verification of two elements requires a team of calculations for a long time, and experimental verification is also required.
That would be too complicated.
There is more than eight hours of time difference between China and Eagle Country. Campbell only saw the content of the email sent by Wang Hao when he came to work in the morning.
"New progress in superconducting related research? Wang Hao's team?"
Campbell immediately realized that it was a big study.
I saw Wang Hao talking about catching up with the next issue of content, and the next issue of "Nature" is in a week. Even the next issue of "Nature-Physics" is only two days apart.
Then there will definitely be no review time.
He hesitated for a moment, but decided to agree first, "Dr. Wang Hao, of course your research can be published. I will arrange the layout in advance and wait for submissions at any time."
After sending the email, Campbell was still hesitant. Both of Wang Hao's results were published in the journal Nature. The first was a study related to the "law of superconductivity", which was reviewed in detail.
The second time was the "Particle Collision Experiment Predicted by the Yang-Mills Equation". Because the prediction had already happened, it meant that the research had been confirmed, so the review was naturally different.
This time is different.
Based on the AC gravity experiment, the direction of studying the superconducting mechanism has attracted international attention. Some experimental groups at American have made progress related to the experiment, and some will submit articles to the magazine "Nature".
Wang Hao's research progress will definitely attract attention, but will it also require peer review if the results are produced?
"Nature" magazine must ensure the quality and correctness of papers.
Campbell is certainly not questioning the quality of the submission, but he still feels that professional review is necessary to eliminate extremely unlikely possibilities.
The internal rules of Nature magazine are that “as long as the paper is not sure to be correct, it requires peer review.”
He hesitated.
Campbell picked up the phone and wanted to ask the editor-in-chief Magdalena Skipper. Then he suddenly thought of his colleague Donald Konidy, whom he met at the banquet.
Donald Conidi is the editor-in-chief of Science magazine. Science, like Nature, is a comprehensive magazine and an academic journal. They have always had fierce competition.
If it were Donald Conady, what would he do if faced with this kind of thing?
Campbell simply sent an email to Donald Conady, briefly talking about what he had encountered, and asking for his opinion.
Donald Konidy is the editor-in-chief of Science magazine, and she is also a female editor-in-chief. The directors of Science and Nature are both women, which is probably what the two top academic magazines have in common.
Konidi received Campbell's email and immediately replied, "Reviewing is a necessary process."
"No matter how famous the scholar is, he still has to review the manuscript. Even if he is the winner of an international award, there may be errors in his new research."
Konidi said a few words of his own opinion, and also copied a rule from the magazine "Science" - all research articles need to be peer-reviewed before being published in the journal. If there are uncertain research contents, they can be classified under "Controversy"
Among the ranks of sexual articles.
There are historical reasons for this provision.
Twenty years ago, Science magazine retracted eight papers published by German physicist Hendrick because many of the data in the papers were fabricated by the authors.
Later, a Hanguo biologist, Hwang Woo-suk, published a paper on human stem cell embryo cloning research, which was found to be an obvious falsification by Seoul National University.
During this period, other incidents of fraud were discovered, and Science magazine fell into a whirlpool of public opinion.
Later, an investigation committee established by Science found that although some papers were reviewed according to normal procedures, they were unable to do anything about deliberate fraud.
Therefore, the investigation committee recommended that the manuscripts received should be classified into non-controversial and controversial articles, so that controversial articles can be reviewed more rigorously.
Campbell naturally knew this history. After receiving Konidi's reply, he thought the other party's suggestion was very reasonable, so he wrote an email to Wang Hao, "Dr. Wang Hao, regarding your latest research, we will quickly review it."
, don’t worry, it will be published in the next issue at the latest.”
Wang Hao saw Campbell's email the next day, and he felt a little baffled.
Review?
In the direction of studying the mechanism of superconductivity based on AC gravity experiments, does his research still need peer review?
Who are the colleagues?
Are there other scholars who are also studying semi-topological geometry and have achieved certain results?
Wang Hao was a little confused. He was very confident in his research, but he was unwilling to wait for the review process.
Reviewing manuscripts always feels like being "censored". Your research needs to be approved by others before it can be published, and you feel as if you are offended.
So he contacted Donald again -
Konidi.
"Science" magazine also pays great attention to him and always sends emails to him to request manuscripts, hoping that he can publish his research in "Science" magazine.
Wang Hao sent the same email.
Less than an hour later, he received a reply from Donald Conidi, "Dr. Wang Hao, your email makes me very excited."
To be continued...