MFMP: Guess the scientist of new bulletproof experiment

Does publishing in subscription funded journals contradict the definition of "open science"?

Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

Apparently not necessarily so. arXive preprints are commonly published.

I believe they are usually accepted for publication and peer reviewed before being uploaded to arXiv. I doubt any major journal would accept a paper verbatim that started life as an arXiv contribution. They would ask the author to rewrite it as a formality.

Could it be a nanor wire frozen in a big block of ice, both held in a big, open transparent box which is placed on a big scale and all put in a freezer room at -20C. Only a few seconds of input power used and measured to get the reaction going, electrical connections then removed.

The big block of ice melts and water boils away. The weight of ice melted and water lost used to calculate energy produced.

I'm assuming the big block of ice couldn't be melted and water boiled away by any chemical reactions taking place in that thin nanor wire. I haven't done any calculations. I leave that to the smarter people.

Wire is analyzed isotopically before and after.

Any chance this is a decent demo?

Jed Rothwell wrote: "I believe they are usually accepted for publication and peer reviewed before being uploaded to arXiv. I doubt any major journal would accept a paper verbatim that started life as an arXiv contribution. They would ask the author to rewrite it as a formality."

Jed and others, this is completely incorrect. Papers are routinely submitted to arxiv before being published. I completely agree with and support the idea that if MFMP thinks they have found something, e.g. an interesting effect, then it could be worthwhile for them to submit for publication. JCMNS is a journal devoted to this, and so would be very suitable. While it may take extra time, the value of such a publication would (or should be if it is properly refereed) that it would contain in a concise manner the key information needed to reproduce the effect (although at the moment I don't think they know how to guarantee 100% reproducibility) but perhaps more importantly would force the authors to do the necessary checks to make sure that their result is not an artefact, and has been well characterized etc. On the other hand, I don't think that this is really the purpose of MFMP's work. It is perhaps more fruitful for them to focus on carrying out LOS experiments, and stimulating and assisting further work by others, which might LATER be carried out more formally by a respected scientific group.

Quote from Alan Smith

You are being suspicious. A peer-reviewed journal would not touch an article previously published on the web.

Alan,
As I wrote in another reply to Jed's comment, this is completely incorrect. Peer-reviewed journals routinely publish articles (usually referred to as "preprints") which are submitted to arxiv. (Before arxiv people mailed paper copies or posted them on their own website.) The peer-reviewing process often necessitates changes, and as a result authors will often post the updated accepted "published" version on arxiv after it has been published.

9

Quote from Mary Yugo

Not vegetable, Alan. Animal. As in bovine excrement. Anyone want to bet?

Wait a minute Mary, I remember when you were accused of being a pathological skeptic, and you replied:

Quote from Mary Yugo

As I said before, I have no interest in claims for small, low level, low power LENR effects. I know nothing about those, I care little about them, and I don't evaluate them. So what?

Quote from Mary Yugo

I know nothing about Pd-D or electrolytic systems, I don't pretend to know about them, I don't comment about them, and I have said that many times.

But it seems you are now not only commenting on them, but also second-guessing the outcome.

Which sounds like the behaviour of a *forgetful person* and a pathoskeptic to me...

Over these many years of Mary watching it is becoming increasingly clear that pink, invisible, flying unicorns holds unique pleasurable fantasies for Mary. What would Sigmund Freud say?

Quote from axil

What would Sigmund Freud say?

He would fetch a Churchill and dump a cloud...

Quote from quizzical

Jed and others, this is completely incorrect. Papers are routinely submitted to arxiv before being published.

I said papers are peer-reviewed and accepted for publication before being uploaded arXiv. I did not say they are published first, before uploading. The scientists I know who publish in peer-reviewed journals wait for the paper to be accepted before uploading it.

Of course many papers on arXiv are never submitted to journals, or they are turned down. But I do not think you will find many examples of papers that were first uploaded, then later submitted, then accepted.

Quote from JedRothwell

Quote from quizzical: “Jed and others, this is completely incorrect. Papers are routinely submitted to arxiv before being published.”
I said papers are peer-reviewed and accepted for publication before being uploaded arXiv. I did not say they are published first, before uploading. The scientists I know who publish in peer-reviewed journals wait for the paper to be accepted before uploading it.

Sorry Jed, still wrong. Many papers are submitted as preprints to arxiv before being accepted (for date priority reasons at the very least) and then the revised, updated version submitted to arxiv once they are accepted. In fact, when you submit, some journals (Physical Review and Physical Review Letters among them) will ask if you have previously posted a preprint on arxiv, and if you have, they ask you to provide the arxiv number, so that this can be included. So these journals, e.g. Physical Review A,B,C,D, and E, and Physical Review Letters do not penalize authors for submitting a preprint to arxiv.

Here are some relevant quotes (May 25, 2013) from the following link: https://www.physicsforums.com/…physical-review-b.693698/

"It is common to upload a paper to arXiv at the same time as submitting it - that's the idea behind a preprint server. Still, as the author you should of course have read the contract you are about to engage in with the publisher. They more often than not explicitly state their policy towards preprint servers. I used to keep a list of journals and their policies on my homepage."

"Uploading a preprint to the arXiv is not a problem with PRB (I always do that). Just make sure you update the submission with the correct reference etc. if/when your manuscript gets published in PRB."

This being said, there are some journals which are more picky about these things, e.g. Nature and probably also Science. But there are many top-quality journals such as Physical Review B where this is not an issue and people routinely upload their "preprints" to a "preprint server" (e.g. arxiv) at the same time as they submit to the journal.

P.S. Some scientists may be cautious and choose to wait until their paper has been accepted before posting, but this is entirely their choice and is not necessary.
P.P.S. As I mentioned, Nature (and possibly Science) may penalize authors for posting on a preprint server, or at least excessively publicizing their preprint before publication. See the following link from 2012:https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201211/preprint.cfm

Here is a rather choice quote from this article:"As the arXiv has become more influential, journals have adapted. Physical Review Letters and other APS journals don’t have embargo policies, and APS permits authors to post preprints of submitted articles (see this month’s Back Page for a comprehensive explication of APS policies). Embargo policies at Nature and Science explicitly allow authors to post preprints of submitted articles without penalty, provided the authors don’t actively pursue press coverage."

Note that in the case mentioned in the 2012 link above, the article was eventually rejected by Nature, not because the author had previously submitted it to the arxiv, but because the author then posted another article on the arxiv which appeared to weaken the arguments of the first article.

Quote from quizzical

Sorry Jed, still wrong. Many papers are submitted as preprints to arxiv before being accepted (for date priority reasons at the very least) and then the revised, updated version submitted to arxiv once they are accepted.

Yes. That is what I said:

Quote from JedRothwell

They would ask the author to rewrite it as a formality.

Quote from JedRothwell

Quote from quizzical: “Sorry Jed, still wrong. Many papers are submitted as preprints to arxiv before being accepted (for date priority reasons at the very least) and then the revised, updated version submitted to arxiv once they are accepted.”
Yes.…

Jed,
It's useless to argue with someone who can't read. This is what you said: "I said papers are peer-reviewed and accepted for publication before being uploaded arXiv."
This is what I said (paraphrasing): "No, often they are submitted to arXiv before being peer-reviewed and accepted."

Do you understand the difference?

In any case the main point is that MFMP would not suffer any penalty if they submitted a paper to a regular scientific journal even though they provided live data via the web.

Just FYI, an MFMP paper has been submitted to the Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, has been prosecuted through peer review, and will be published within 60 days.

Quote from quizzical

This is what I said (paraphrasing): "No, often they are submitted to arXiv before being peer-reviewed and accepted."

I know what you said, but as far as I know, you are wrong. The big name journals have a policy of rejecting papers that have circulated already.